Ideological biases in social sharing of online information about climate change

17. Elgesem D, Steskal L, Diakopoulos N. Structure and Content of the Discourse on Climate Change in the Blogosphere: The Big Picture. Environmental Communication. 2015; 9(2):169–188. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/17524032.2014.983536 18. Williams HTP, McMurray JR, Kurz T, Lambert FH. Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change. Global Environmental Change. 2015; 32:126– 138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.006 19. Conover MD, Gonc¸alves B, Flammini A, Menczer F. Partisan asymmetries in online political activity. EPJ Data Science. 2012; 1(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds6 20. Conover M, Ratkiewicz J, Francisco M, Gonc¸alves B, Menczer F, Flammini A. Political Polarization on Twitter. In: International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media; 2011. p. 89–96. Available from: https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/paper/view/2847. 21. Weeks BE, Lane DS, Kim DH, Lee SS, Kwak N. Incidental Exposure, Selective Exposure, and Political Information Sharing: Integrating Online Exposure Patterns and Expression on Social Media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2017; 22(6):363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12199 22. Choi J, Lee JK. Investigating the effects of news sharing and political interest on social media network heterogeneity. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 44:258–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014. 11.029 23. Bakshy E, Messing S, Adamic L. Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Sci- ence. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160 PMID: 25953820

24. Adamic LA, Glance N. The Political Blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. Election: Divided They Blog. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Link Discovery. LinkKDD’05. ACM; 2005. p. 36–43. Available from: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1134271.1134277. 25. Sunstein CR. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press; 2007. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/j.ctt7tbsw. 26. O’Neill SJ, Hulme M. An iconic approach for representing climate change. Global Environmental Change. 2009; 19(4):402–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.07.004 27. Del Vicario M, Bessi A, Zollo F, Petroni F, Scala A, Caldarelli G, et al. The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2016; 113(3):554–559. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.1517441113 28. Jasny L, Waggle J, Fisher DR. An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy net- works. Nature Climate Change. 2015; 5:782–786. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2666 29. Ha¨ussler T. Heating up the debate? Measuring fragmentation and polarisation in a German climate change hyperlink network. Social Networks. 2018; 54:303–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017. 10.002 30. Del Vicario M, Scala A, Caldarelli G, Stanley HE, Quattrociocchi W. Modeling confirmation bias and polarization. Scientific Reports. 2017; 7(1):40391. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40391 PMID: 28074874 31. Newman TP. Tracking the release of IPCC AR5 on Twitter: Users, comments, and sources following the release of the Working Group I Summary for Policymakers. Public Understanding of Science. 2017;

26(7):815–825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516628477 PMID: 26868025 32. Kirilenko AP, Stepchenkova SO. Public microblogging on climate change: One year of Twitter world- wide. Global Environmental Change. 2014; 26:171–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02. 008 33. Jang SM, Hart PS. Polarized frames on “climate change” and “global warming” across countries and states: Evidence from Twitter big data. Global Environmental Change. 2015; 32:11–17. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.02.010 34. O’Neill S, Williams HTP, Kurz T, Wiersma B, Boykoff M. Dominant frames in legacy and social media coverage of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Nature Climate Change. 2015; 5. 35. Schuldt JP, Konrath SH, Schwarz N. “Global warming” or “climate change”? Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2011; 75(1):115–124. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/poq/nfq073 36. Farrell J. Network structure and influence of the climate change counter-movement. Nature Climate Change. 2016; 6(4):370–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2875 37. Freelon D, Marwick A, Kreiss D. False equivalencies: Online activism from left to right. Science. 2020; 369(6508):1197–1201. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb2428 PMID: 32883863 38. Starbird K. Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem Through the Production of Alternative Narra- tives of Mass Shooting Events on Twitter. In: International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media; 2017. p. 230–239. Available from: https://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM17/paper/ view/15603. PLOS ONE

Ideological biases in social sharing of online information about climate change PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250656 April 23, 2021 24 / 25