Research Stream “Civil society Groups”

Lead Coordinator:
Prof. Dr. Swen Hutter

Principle Investigators:
Prof. Dr. Swen Hutter, Prof. Dr. Barbara Pfetsch, Prof. Dr. Simon Koschut

Postdoctoral Researcher:
Dr. Clara van den Berg, Dr. Rico Neumann

Considering that collective actors within civil society play a crucial role in articulating and mobilizing sentiments, this stream goes beyond the coping resources and strategies of individuals and social interactions. Using a combination of methods comprising content analysis, network analysis, ethnographic and interview methods, we primarily analyze group-level communication expressed via digital media.

In online public spheres, the sorting of group-based differences is facilitated and accelerated, highlighting the need for effective strategies to navigate such polarized information environments. Our goal is to identify and classify such coping strategies in the context of civil society which entails different public demands and influences. How affective polarization, including its consequences, is reflected in our communication, language and social networks, and which strategies groups and organizations in civil society employ to cope with these challenges is thus the main focus of our Research Stream ‘Civil Society Groups’.

Research Questions and Objectives

  • What discursive networks emerge from interactions within civil society and with non-civil society actors in polarized information environments?

  • In what ways does affective polarization manifest in language and communication?

  • Which communicative strategies do civil society groups use to cope with the negative consequences of affective polarization?

Finding answers to these questions, our research agenda focuses on three main topics, combining various conceptual and methodological approaches:

We take a bird’s-eye perspective to understand how civil society groups navigate polarized information environments. Using quantitative content and network analysis, we explore how affective polarization is expressed in language and reflected in the discourse networks of these groups. For example, we examine the use of incivility and hate speech, and how groups may both drive and be targets of such language. Key research questions include how these communication dynamics are reflected in discourse networks of civil society groups and how the links are used to build alliances, attack others, and cope with attacks.

We examine the internal structures and decision-making processes of key civil society actors. Through digital ethnography and in-depth interviews with activists, we identify strategies used to cope with affective polarization. These may include disengagement strategies (e.g. avoidance) or engagement strategies such as bridge-building. Such choices depend on organizational goals, resources, and external factors. Our goal is to identify conditions under which decision-makers in civil society groups adopt a particular coping strategy to navigate polarized environments, with implications for polarizing – or depolarizing – public debates.

We aim to integrate insights from this Research Stream with trends in public opinion captured by the Berlin Polarization Monitor. For example, while affective polarization may drive political participation, it can also deepen divides between active and inactive individuals. Similarly, civic engagement can either depolarize debates or increase fragmentation. Using our Monitor’s panel data, we explore how forms of civic engagement relate to affective polarization. Additionally, we analyze how media use and social identity influence polarization, focusing on digital exposure to civil society groups.

Research Streams