Wenlu Fan

Wentao Xu, Wenlu Fan, Yuqi Zhu et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities in text generation, yet their emotional consistency and semantic coherence in social media contexts remain insufficiently understood. This study investigates how LLMs handle emotional content and maintain semantic relationships through continuation and response tasks using three open-source models: Gemma, Llama3 and Llama3.3 and one commercial Model:Claude. By analyzing climate change discussions from Twitter and Reddit, we examine emotional transitions, intensity patterns, and semantic consistency between human-authored and LLM-generated content. Our findings reveal that while both models maintain high semantic coherence, they exhibit distinct emotional patterns: these models show a strong tendency to moderate negative emotions. When the input text carries negative emotions such as anger, disgust, fear, or sadness, LLM tends to generate content with more neutral emotions, or even convert them into positive emotions such as joy or surprise. At the same time, we compared the LLM-generated content with human-authored content. The four models systematically generated responses with reduced emotional intensity and showed a preference for neutral rational emotions in the response task. In addition, these models all maintained a high semantic similarity with the original text, although their performance in the continuation task and the response task was different. These findings provide deep insights into the emotion and semantic processing capabilities of LLM, which are of great significance for its deployment in social media environments and human-computer interaction design.

Wentao Xu, Wenlu Fan, Shiqian Lu et al.

The rise of misinformation and fake news in online political discourse poses significant challenges to democratic processes and public engagement. While debunking efforts aim to counteract misinformation and foster fact-based dialogue, these discussions often involve language toxicity and emotional polarization. We examined over 86 million debunking tweets and more than 4 million Reddit debunking comments to investigate the relationship between language toxicity, pessimism, and social polarization in debunking efforts. Focusing on discussions of the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections and the QAnon conspiracy theory, our analysis reveals three key findings: (1) peripheral participants (1-degree users) play a disproportionate role in shaping toxic discourse, driven by lower community accountability and emotional expression; (2) platform mechanisms significantly influence polarization, with Twitter amplifying partisan differences and Reddit fostering higher overall toxicity due to its structured, community-driven interactions; and (3) a negative correlation exists between language toxicity and pessimism, with increased interaction reducing toxicity, especially on Reddit. We show that platform architecture affects informational complexity of user interactions, with Twitter promoting concentrated, uniform discourse and Reddit encouraging diverse, complex communication. Our findings highlight the importance of user engagement patterns, platform dynamics, and emotional expressions in shaping polarization in debunking discourse. This study offers insights for policymakers and platform designers to mitigate harmful effects and promote healthier online discussions, with implications for understanding misinformation, hate speech, and political polarization in digital environments.