
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


You may have heard that Facebook manipulated the content of user's New Feeds during January of 2012 so that some users saw more positive posts than others, which other Facebook users saw more negative posts. How did this affect these users? Did those who say negative posts become more negative and vice versa? The answer is that the research indicates that some of them - though a very, very few of them - did subsequently write posts that were similar to the ones that saw on their News Feed. How big of an effect is this? Is it unethical? Does agreeing to Facebook's Terms of Use constitute "informed consent". I examine these questions in this episode of The Psych Files.
By Michael Britt4.2
288288 ratings
You may have heard that Facebook manipulated the content of user's New Feeds during January of 2012 so that some users saw more positive posts than others, which other Facebook users saw more negative posts. How did this affect these users? Did those who say negative posts become more negative and vice versa? The answer is that the research indicates that some of them - though a very, very few of them - did subsequently write posts that were similar to the ones that saw on their News Feed. How big of an effect is this? Is it unethical? Does agreeing to Facebook's Terms of Use constitute "informed consent". I examine these questions in this episode of The Psych Files.

22,000 Listeners

63,726 Listeners

43,566 Listeners

11,355 Listeners

1,081 Listeners

1,219 Listeners

1,855 Listeners

515 Listeners

823 Listeners

1,138 Listeners

945 Listeners

3,902 Listeners

2,875 Listeners

114 Listeners

1,543 Listeners

1,378 Listeners

1,388 Listeners

605 Listeners

333 Listeners

8,282 Listeners

332 Listeners

402 Listeners

808 Listeners

724 Listeners

20,420 Listeners