{"id":68808,"date":"2014-06-30T15:24:53","date_gmt":"2014-06-30T13:24:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/onsoftware.en.softonic.com\/?p=68808"},"modified":"2025-07-02T00:37:04","modified_gmt":"2025-07-02T07:37:04","slug":"facebook-emotional-contagion-experiment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cms-articles.softonic.io\/en\/facebook-emotional-contagion-experiment\/","title":{"rendered":"Facebook experiment that manipulated user emotion sparks outrage"},"content":{"rendered":"

A recently published study revealed Facebook<\/a> manipulated the News Feed of nearly 700,000 users<\/strong> to test emotional contagiousness<\/strong>. The experiment, which took place in 2012, involved scanning posts for positive and negative words and rewording them to fit each emotion. Facebook then measured the emotional impact of positive vs negative News Feeds.<\/p>\n

The results of the experiment showed limited effects<\/strong>. The study concluded that users shown negative posts only exhibited 0.1% fewer positive words<\/strong> in their posts. Those shown positive news composed updates with 0.07% fewer negative words<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Still, users are outraged that users were unknowingly part of Facebook’s experiment without having the option to opt-out. Some argue that Facebook’s experiment could have had real world consequences<\/strong>. Users suffering from depression may have been negatively affected by negative posts.<\/p>\n

So was this Facebook study legal?<\/h3>\n

Absolutely. By agreeing to Facebook’s terms of service<\/strong>, users are relinquishing their data to the social network for experiments like this. Although Facebook isn’t transparent about its data experiments, it’s Data Use Policy<\/a> does allow it.<\/p>\n

Was the study unethical?<\/h3>\n

It depends who you ask. While Facebook had an internal ethics review<\/strong>, it didn’t ask an independent institution <\/strong>like the Institutional Review Board<\/a> to look at the experiment.<\/p>\n

Facebook data scientist Adam Kramer expressed regret<\/a> about the experiment.<\/p>\n

“I can understand why some people have concerns about it, and my coauthors and I are very sorry for the way the paper described the research and any anxiety it caused. In hindsight, the research benefits of the paper may not have justified all of this anxiety.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The scary thing is that many companies are doing the same thing<\/strong> without telling its customers. For a more in-depth look at the morality of A\/B testing<\/a>, check out this TechCrunch<\/em> article.<\/p>\n

Source: PNAS<\/a><\/p>\n

Via: Forbes<\/a><\/p>\n

Follow Lewis on Twitter @lewisleong<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

RELATED STORIES<\/p>\n