Conflicting Rationales, Shifting Stances: Unpacking User Divergence in Online Geopolitical Debates

Online discourse surrounding geopolitical crises is volatile and complex. For example, users can often change their opinions, and apply rationales divergently based on the specific scenario under discussion. This paper explores such stance and rationale divergence in social media discussions. We focus on two major ongoing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine wars. Through this, we identify a set of users who discuss both conflicts, and then label each user’s comments with their stance and associated rationale. Using this unique dataset, we explore how people apply rationales divergently, and evolve their opinions over time. Our research contributes to the CHI community by providing a reusable, rationale-level annotation methodology. Our findings can inform the design of moderation tools, recommender systems, and discussion interfaces. These can be used to surface disagreements, calibrate echo-chamber exposure, and ultimately foster healthier online discourse.