Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles

What they are and why they are dangerous

“Echo chambers are a complex phenomenon, the result of many factors. But as a society, we have a duty to fight them: personally, analyzing how we inform ourselves and what our level of risk is; and collectively, who we talk to, who we work with or which groups we belong to.”—Enrique Dans, professor of information systems

An echo chamber is an environment where members encounter only information and viewpoints that reflect and reinforce their own. Echo chambers can happen anywhere, online and in real life.  

Echo chambers are driven by confirmation biases, the tendency of people to group with like people, and that the media and social media play on these tendencies. While the internet provides a great diversity of information and viewpoints, people filter and curate their news, sources and information to create narrow groups.   

Cass Sunstein, professor of law and director of the Program on Behavioral Economics and Public Policy at Harvard University, writes, “(A)n unfortunate and largely unintended consequence of the rise of social media is that instead of being better informed and exposed to ever-broadening viewpoints, research shows that Americans today are more polarized and draw from shrinking pools of news. Many people now operate in virtual gated communities as a result of their culled Facebook and Twitter feeds and the opaque corporate algorithms that organize people into invisible groups.”

An epistemic bubble is an environment where important sources and information are excluded, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally. Members within epistemic bubbles are unaware of significant information and perspectives. These are not considered echo chambers because they are shattered when the members are provided with missing information and arguments.

An echo chamber is an epistemic bubble in which voices are not only actively excluded but discredited. Echo chambers say that not only are outside viewpoints incorrect but bad, untrustworthy, and corrupt. A climate change denier may distrust science and consider it an inherently corrupt enterprise. A progressive, religious or conservative echo chamber will consider and characterize contrary viewpoints as inherently bad and paint opponents as bad or ignorant people with bad intentions. Echo chambers often have a moral element, considering their views morally correct and opposing views and opponents as immoral.   

Philosophy professor Thi Nguyen writes, “An echo chamber is what happens when insiders come to distrust everyone on the outside.” 

Unlike with epistemic bubbles, providing new information and reasoning doesn’t work in echo chambers because its members don’t trust the source and countering facts. This is what makes them so dangerous.

How do you know if you are in an echo chamber? An echo chamber is when everything in your group reflects your interests and views. Not only are you not exposed to different views and opinions, but the members actively discredit and even defame different viewpoints and sources. Countering facts and data are ignored or discredited. Often, viewpoints are supported by rumors and incomplete evidence.

Echo chambers are sources of fake news, conspiracy theories, and extreme political and social polarization. They can undermine democracy and increase extremism. Social psychologist Muhammad Atari writes, “In our research, we find that the more people are in morally homogeneous environments, the more likely they are to resort to radical means to defend themselves and their values.”  

In his essay “The echo chamber has destroyed faith in our American democracy,” Dan Mahaffee, senior vice president and director of policy at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress, writes, “The absence of a common narrative has created a vacuum into which tribal partisanship and misinformation flow. For political provocateurs at home and propagandists abroad, this vacuum is inviting.”

Dissent and different viewpoints are essential for all organizations, from businesses to academic fields. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt says that organizations and areas that stifle dissent and heterodoxy will assuredly make bad choices. Business management professors Ines Alegre and Josep Valor write that echo chambers are bad for businesses and that project teams should ask for neutral outside input and assign one team member to act as a devil’s advocate.

To avoid getting into echo chambers know the signs of echo chambers and know that we all can fall into them. Be aware that you have confirmation biases and are prone to believing that which meets your expectations and biases. Expand your news sources to get different and countering viewpoints and information. Interact with people of different perspectives, and actively seek out people with views counter to yours.  

.

See also:

Cognitive biases

The Dangers of Demonizing Opponents