Multi-level analysis of adverse social interactions on X and Bluesky finds structural negativity more persistently marks subgroup disruption while toxic communication captures broader conflict.
Mesoscopic analysis of online social networks - The role of negative ties
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
A class of networks are those with both positive and negative links. In this manuscript, we studied the interplay between positive and negative ties on mesoscopic level of these networks, i.e., their community structure. A community is considered as a tightly interconnected group of actors; therefore, it does not borrow any assumption from balance theory and merely uses the well-known assumption in the community detection literature. We found that if one detects the communities based on only positive relations (by ignoring the negative ones), the majority of negative relations are already placed between the communities. In other words, negative ties do not have a major role in detecting communities of studied signed networks. Moreover, regarding the internal negative ties, we proved that most unbalanced communities are maximally balanced, and hence they cannot be partitioned into k nonempty sub-clusters with higher balancedness (k >= 2). Furthermore, we showed that although the mediator triad ++- (hostile-mediator-hostile) is underrepresented, it constitutes a considerable portion of triadic relations among communities. Hence, mediator triads should not be ignored by community detection and clustering algorithms. As a result, if one uses a clustering algorithm that operates merely based on social balance, mesoscopic structure of signed networks significantly remains hidden.
fields
cs.SI 1years
2026 1verdicts
UNVERDICTED 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Adverse Online Social Interactions: A Multi-Level Evolutionary Analysis of Local Patterns, Diffusion, and Community Disruption
Multi-level analysis of adverse social interactions on X and Bluesky finds structural negativity more persistently marks subgroup disruption while toxic communication captures broader conflict.