Political Polarisation Dynamics within the Digital Ecosystem: Perceptions and Practices among University Students

Social networks have transformed the way individuals access political information, interact with different opinions and participate in public debate – in fact, this debate is essentially done on social networks. Although these platforms promote rapid access to information, several studies suggest that they can also contribute to political polarization, favoring selective exposure to content compatible with users' beliefs and reducing contact with divergent perspectives (Lu, et al., 2024; Kubin & Sikorski, 2021; Piccardi et al., 2025; Wazzan & Aldamen (2023). Political polarization refers to the process by which individuals, groups, or political parties become progressively more ideologically and/or affective distant, reducing moderation and increasing opposition between rival political positions (McCarty, Poole, & Rosenthal, 2006; Iyengar & Westwood, 2015). There are several dimensions usually pointed out to political polarization (dimension related to ideological position, dimension related to mass polarization, dimension related to the polarization of elites and affective polarization) - this last dimension often stands out in the context of Political Psychology - and which is understood as the increase in antipathy, distrust and hostility between supporters of different political groups (Iyengar et al., 2012). The study of these themes is of crucial importance, since we are aware of the importance that social networks have today and the consequences arising from political polarization, whether psychological (increased hostility between groups, reinforcement of cognitive biases, radicalization of attitudes), or social (decreased tolerance, social fragmentation, reduced social trust, ) and also consequences for democracy (difficulty in dialogue and consensus, institutional blockade, delegitimization of opponents).
Our choice falls on a sample of university students, which, as we know, constitutes one of the groups with the greatest use of social networks. For this reason, it is relevant to understand how the consumption of political content on these platforms is associated with political polarization and the consequences that such polarization can entail: a lower openness to academic debate, the avoidance of colleagues with divergent opinions, greater conflict in political discussions, the formation of ideologically homogeneous groups and a lower willingness to consider alternative perspectives.
Objective: This research seeks to understand the relationship between the use of social networks to obtain political information and the levels of political polarization among university students – that is, how does this influence the political polarization of students?




SDG 16 – Peace, Justice and Strong InstitutionsPolitical polarization, democracy, social trust, public debate
SDG 4 – Quality EducationDigital literacy, critical thinking, university students
SDG 10 – Reduction of InequalitiesAffective polarization, hostility between groups, exclusion