It is not only ok but it is actually healthy to block from your feed political trolls that knowingly lie, attack, and insult other users. The more you block, the more violent trolls will only follow each other. Please, block uncivil users and keep them off-your-wall!

RT @paduis: Just published! Our conjoint experiments in Argentina and Chile show stronger support for policies co-designed with trusted act….

RT @CpoliticaUBA: 👉Ernesto Calvo (@ecalvo68) expondrá “Noticiabilidad y polarización: suspenso, sorpresa y la brecha entre ganadores y perd….

RT @ricarthuguet: Just out @WorldDevJournal!🥳Vicky Paniagua (LSE) & I propose the concept DUAL MALAPPORTIONMENT (legislative mal. cabinet….

RT @aracalacana: ❤️.

RT @CEPEDiTella: Ayer fue el panel "Inteligencia artificial en campaña: riesgos, oportunidades y nuevos desafíos democráticos", organizado….

RT @sanchezgalicia1: Otro libro 📚 indispensable 👉🏼 para entender la guerra entre lo falso y lo verdadero en la red: “Nosotros contra ellos”….

RT @JITP_APSA: 🆕This study uses a trust game to examine the impact of polarizing social media messages on political #trust & trustworthines….

The most important finding?.We may still act ethically even in polarized environments. …but we assume others won’t. So, negative social media messages increase the trust-trustworthiness gap.

Brazil showed stronger effects than 🇲🇽 Mexico. Why? Possibly higher political polarization, or different media ecosystems. But the pattern held: more engagement = less trust in others.

More important!.The effect was stronger if users engaged with the tweet (like, retweet, reply). Passive scrolling didn’t move the needle. 👆 But active engagement amplified distrust. Reading isn’t reacting — and reacting shapes belief

Here’s what we found:. 🧠 Trust declined after reading polarizing tweets — especially when they came from out-group politicians. ❤️ But trustworthiness stayed stable. People still kept their promises. They just believed others wouldn’t

2/3 of participants were exposed to a tweet before their second decision to cast votes or entrust to others. Tweets were:.🔵 Polarizing or not.🔵 From in-group or out-group politicians.🧪 Designed to mimic real-world political messaging.

3/.To make the experiment incentive-compatible, participants could win iPads by collecting votes for their chosen candidate. They could 🗳 Vote themselves (1 ticket) or gain a larger reward if they🤝 entrust someone else to vote for them (2 tickets)

2/.We test how exposure to partisan tweets affects two things:.🔹 Trust — Do we believe others will keep promises?.🔹 Trustworthiness — Do we keep our own promises?.We adapt a survey experiment to run an online “trust game” with 4,700+ participants in 🇧🇷 and 🇲🇽.

🧵1/.Do polarizing political tweets make us less trustworthy?.Not quite. But they do make us trust others less. Our article with @natyaruguete @_Tiagoventura and Carlos Scartascini shows how social media erodes trust — even when we stay principled.

RT @BernsteinLuciaa: "Los primeros 100 días de Trump fueron más extremos de lo que pensamos", dice el politólogo @ecalvo68 . ✍️ El Observad….

RT @ShibleyTelhami: This should send a chill down every American's spine: The President of the United States Touts Seemingly Doctored Photo….

RT @ShibleyTelhami: Video obtained by AP shows Israeli settler assault on small Palestinian village with rare clarity .

RT @abuelasdifusion: 📢 ¡30.000 compañeros detenidos-desaparecidos, presentes! ¡Ahora y siempre!

GUEST POST: We Are Professors at Columbia. Here is How We Would Respond., by @dandrezner