The four dark laws of online engagement and the science of group psychology

Issue 120: The "devil's playbook" for dark behavior online

Each day, we scroll through roughly 300 feet of social media content—that is equivalent to the height of the Statue of Liberty! This constant engagement is not just habitual; it fundamentally alters our identities and realities. Social media holds a fun-house mirror up to society, distorting our perceptions of reality, and the incentives and engagement structures of social media put us in constant conflict with one another.

I was recently invited to discuss my research on the profound impacts of social media on our psychological makeup and social behaviors on the podcast “Plain English with Derek Thompson”. He distilled my research into a "devil's playbook" of online engagement and we discussed four dark laws on online engagement that are shaping our social relationships.

The fundamental aspects of group psychology—our ability to join and identify with groups—is among the most unique human traits. Indeed, we are the only primate who will engage with prosocial behavior with in-group members—even if they are anonymous. But too often, social media exploits this aspect of human nature to keep us hooked in the attention economy. Too often, this fosters a cynical, us-vs-them view of the world.

Jays’ lab has published papers on how the internet became a fun-house mirror of extreme political opinions, why the news media has a strong negativity bias, why certain emotions go viral online, why tribalism is inflamed by online activity, and how the internet can make us seem like the worst versions of ourselves. At the same time, he emphasizes that many of the group psychology dynamics that can make social media seem like a dumpster fire are also core to what makes humankind such a special and ingenious species. We discuss the four dark laws of online engagement and the basics of group psychology.

I have summarized our conversation here, but encourage you to check out the full conversation on his podcast (below) or read Derek’s summary (here) or Twitter/X thread on our conversation:

1. Negativity Drives Engagement

It’s no secret that our brains are wired to respond to negative information more strongly than positive cues. This evolutionary trait, meant to protect us from dangers, now underpins the very fabric of our digital interactions. Our research (led by my student Claire Robertson) finds that negative words in news headlines significantly increase click rates. We analyzed 105,000 different variations of news stories generating 5.7 million clicks and found that "for a headline of average length, each additional negative word increased the click-through rate by 2.3%"

This negativity bias is not just a reflection of media practices but a fundamental aspect of human psychology. Bad is stronger than good. Online, this predisposition is amplified by algorithms, shaping a landscape where the bleakest content often beckons the loudest. This creates a demand for even more negative content!

2. Extremism Commands Attention

In the vast echo chambers of the internet, moderate voices often get drowned out by more extreme perspectives. On Twitter, 97% of political posts on Twitter come from 10% of the most active users, and 90% of political opinions are represented by less than 3% of tweets. Because these users are disproportionately extreme, it creates a situation where the moderate majority, which might be dominant in reality, is absent online. This can distort public discourse and create false norms.

Why does this happen? Because extremism is engaging, it sparks outrage, drives comments, and fuels the fires of viral content. This skew creates a false perception of polarization, where the middle ground seems to vanish into the ether of online rage and fervor. This is why we call social media a “funhouse mirror factory”. I have a new paper on this topic with Claire Robertson and Kareena del Rosario

3. Out-Group Animosity Captures Clicks

We also discussed how mentions of political enemies (those perceived as different or oppositional) can increase the odds of content being shared by huge margins. In a paper led by my postdoc, Steve Rathje, we found that "Posts about the political out-group were shared or retweeted about twice as often as posts about the in-group. Each individual term referring to the political out-group increased the odds of a social media post being shared by 67%."

This phenomenon taps into our primal group dynamics—identifying and rallying against a common enemy solidifies in-group bonds and is a powerful motivator for online engagement. Social media platforms, driven by the desire to maximize user interaction, often promote divisiveness by prioritizing content that pits us against one another.

4. Moral Emotional Language Magnifies Messages

Finally, the language we use online significantly impacts how content is shared and perceived. Using moral-emotional language—words that convey moral indignation or virtue—can make a post far more shareable. In a paper led by my students Billy Brady and Julian Wills, “Using a large sample of social media communications about three polarizing moral/political issues (n = 563,312), we observed that the presence of moral-emotional words in messages increased their diffusion by a factor of 20% for each additional word.” Framing ideas in high-arousal, highly moral, and highly emotional language makes ideas go viral within our own ideological networks but alienates people who are different. So, the righteous tone of much online conversation essentially fortifies the walls of our echo chambers.

Whether it’s outrage or admiration, using language with emotional weight fuels virality in a way that sober, neutral phrasing seldom achieves. This factor is crucial in understanding why certain narratives gain traction quickly and dominate our feeds. It also creates an incentive to share more content with this language.

Using the Four Dark Laws for Good

These four dark laws—negativity, extremism, out-group animosity, and moral emotional language—form the pillars of engagement in the digital world. They are not merely bugs in the system but features of a platform designed to capture and retain our attention at any cost. Understanding these dynamics not only offers us insight into our digital behaviors; it provides a roadmap for navigating and improving our online environments. In recognizing the patterns using the four laws, we can strive to create digital spaces that promote healthier interactions and more balanced perspectives.

So what can be done to counter the influence of the Four Dark Laws?

• Recognize when language is being used to create division by leaders, propagandists, trolls, and foreign operatives. They are trying to manipulate you and erode public trust.

• When engaging with others online, try to frame issues in a more inclusive—and persuasive—way. Choose language that emphasizes common values and goals, rather than dehumanizing people who disagree with you. You can easily express your opinion or disagree without using these words, and perhaps even convince someone.

• Avoid sources that use alarmist, us-vs-them, or black-and-white language. Be sure to seek out reliable news sources that report news and events, and share these sources with people you know. (We recommend the Associated Press).¹

---

News and Updates

Jay gave a keynote address on “The Science of Misinformation and What we can Do About It” for the Health Care Quality Forum in Vancouver, BC a few weeks ago. You can watch the full talk below:

We are finally announcing our bi-monthly virtual meeting for paid subscribers! This is a chance for you to meet one-on-one or in small groups with Jay and Dom to talk about anything you want (e.g., our book, the topics we cover in this newsletter, our latest research, a problem you’re struggling with, or whatever else you want).

We will send out an RSVP link on June 5th to all paid subscribers to sign up for one or more sessions. If you are thinking about upgrading your subscription, make sure to upgrade by June 4th to participate in the June sessions.

All times in Eastern Standard Time (New York, USA):

• Dom: June 10th @ 1-2pm | July 8th @ 1-2pm | August 26th 1-2pm

• Jay: June 24th @ 1-2pm | July 18th @ 3-4pm | August 8th 3-4pm

---

Catch up on the last one…

Last week’s post was a controversial one but has become one of our most popular articles! In case you missed it, find out why Astrology and assessments such as the MBTI have gained such a cult following:

1. This post was drafted by Jay, with input from Yvonne