Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
News

Jeffrey Hancock Wants to Keep Talking About How We Use Social Media for Research

By Steve Kolowich April 20, 2015
Jeffrey Hancock, a professor at Cornell, caused a furor when he used Facebook to do an experiment on emotion.
Jeffrey Hancock, a professor at Cornell, caused a furor when he used Facebook to do an experiment on emotion.Heather Ainsworth

The most widely read paper of Jeffrey Hancock’s career was not conceived in a university laboratory. The data were collected by machines. The subjects were unwitting. The methods were not approved by an institutional review board.

That’s because a university was not in charge of the study. Facebook was.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

The most widely read paper of Jeffrey Hancock’s career was not conceived in a university laboratory. The data were collected by machines. The subjects were unwitting. The methods were not approved by an institutional review board.

That’s because a university was not in charge of the study. Facebook was.

Mr. Hancock, a professor of communication and information science at Cornell University, and Jamie Guillory, a Cornell graduate student, wrote the paper with Adam Kramer, a data scientist at Facebook. For years the professor had been studying people’s relationships with text-based communication. Facebook, which has nearly 1.4 billion users worldwide, was uniquely positioned to track how online social networks can affect people’s emotions.

It was a natural marriage — and a portentous one. Companies are collecting more data than ever about how their customers use their products, and frequently conduct discreet experiments, called A/B tests, to see how those customers respond to tweaks in a website’s design and functionality.

  • Tech Innovators 2015

    Check out the rest of the Digital Campus issue and meet more of the people who are helping to drive change through education technology.

As everyday human interaction has migrated to data-rich social-media and online-dating platforms, the companies that run those platforms have become gatekeepers. The ability of academic researchers to keep pace with corporate data scientists may depend on how well they can work with those companies. After his own collaboration with Facebook created a furor, Mr. Hancock, 41, found himself at the center of a debate about the ethical obligations of companies and their academic collaborators as they mine data from commercial web services in hopes of better understanding human behavior in the Internet age.

The story of Mr. Hancock’s collaboration with Facebook began in 2006, when he started investigating the idea that typed conversations hold less emotional charge than face-to-face ones. “I would see this assumption written into scientific papers,” he says. “I would see it written into how people would talk about tech.” Computer-mediated communication was considered inferior.

Mr. Hancock doubted this truism, and he began chipping away at it in a series of experiments. He found that the dynamics of text-based interaction were nuanced. People could detect irony. They could pick up on social cues. People who were lying via text made subtle adjustments to the kinds of words they were using. Remarkably, people who were being lied to also made adjustments, even when they couldn’t spot the deception.

People bury their noses in their iPhones not because they are socially stunted, says Mr. Hancock. If anything, they are more social than ever before.

And yet his lab experiments had limitations. The sample sizes were relatively small, and the researchers had to go to somewhat absurd lengths to control unwieldy variables like the emotional state of a test subject. “If we wanted to make somebody happy, for example, we had to show them a really funny clip,” says Mr. Hancock. “And then we’d have to continue priming them while they talked to another person. So we’d have really happy music on, for example. And we’d have them solving anagrams leading to really happy words — like ‘awesome’ and ‘fun’ and ‘happy’ and that kind of stuff.”

In 2011, Facebook was trying to battle the notion that its product was making users unhappy. A Stanford University study had reinforced the idea that people overestimate the happiness of their friends. That study didn’t have to do with Facebook directly, but the author said he got the idea after noticing how Facebook seemed to fuel those misapprehensions. “By helping other people look happy, Facebook is making us sad,” declared a headline on Slate.

ADVERTISEMENT

By then, Mr. Hancock had developed a professional relationship with Mr. Kramer, the Facebook data scientist. (Mr. Kramer declined an interview request.) They agreed to work together on a project. The now-infamous study tested an existing theory called “emotional contagion.” By reducing the proportion of “positive” or “negative” posts visible to certain Facebook users, and analyzing the emotional content of the posts those users would then write, the researchers hoped to glean insights into whether emotions can spread through online social networks.

The study was larger than anything Mr. Hancock could have cooked up at Cornell. During a single week, in January 2012, Facebook experimented on nearly 700,000 users — over a hundred times as many test subjects than Mr. Hancock believes he has studied in 18 years as a researcher. And the company didn’t have to drag a single person into a laboratory.

The process was so hands-off, in fact, that the Facebook users did not even know they were test subjects.

Scientifically, the experiment was a success. The researchers were able to show that people who see fewer “negative” words on Facebook tend to post more positive words to the site, and that the inverse is true of people who see fewer “positive” words.

ADVERTISEMENT

The researchers got their results without creating much of a ripple; at the level of individual users, the effects were vanishingly small. On average, people who saw a decrease in the positive words visible in their news feeds ended up typing 0.04 percent more negative words than the control group. That is the equivalent of four extra sad words for every 10,000.

When the study came out last year, however, the backlash was huge. Mr. Hancock and his co-authors faced a deluge of negativity far worse than anything they had prescribed in the study. It included not just professional criticisms but also hate mail and threats. Facebook’s platform offered a reach beyond what previous generations of social scientists could have dreamed of, but it also created enmity at a dizzying scale. The experience was traumatic enough that even now, almost a year later, Mr. Hancock is reluctant to talk about it.

Other scientists rushed to defend the study. “The vitriolic criticism of this study could have a chilling effect on valuable research,” wrote Michelle N. Meyer, a bioethicist, in Nature.

Duncan J. Watts, a former Columbia University sociologist who now works for Microsoft Research, pointed out that companies are always manipulating people’s emotions on the sly. “The only difference between the Facebook study and everyday life,” he wrote in The Guardian, “is that the researchers were trying to understand the effect of that manipulation.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The legacy of the Facebook study might have more to do with research ethics than with social science. The paper has been cited more than 100 times since it was published in June, according to Mr. Hancock, and more than half of those citations refer to the ethical concerns it raised rather than to its insights on emotional contagion. The Cornell professor has accepted several invitations to talk about the ethical implications of “computational social science” — research that plumbs large data sets, often collected from people using commercial products and services. “I want to help with that conversation,” he says. “Talking about it seems like an important way to move forward.” (In October, Facebook introduced new policies aimed at handling some of the issues raised by the study.)

One important lesson from the study became apparent only after the analysis was published: “We have this giant study — super impersonal, machines are doing all the analysis,” says Mr. Hancock. And yet the backlash suggests that “these big data-science studies feel much more personal than traditional science in a lab at a university.”

Steve Kolowich writes about how colleges are changing, and staying the same, in the digital age. Follow him on Twitter @stevekolowich, or write to him at steve.kolowich@chronicle.com.

Read other items in The Digital Campus: Tech Innovators 2015.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Technology
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
About the Author
Steve Kolowich
Steve Kolowich was a senior reporter for The Chronicle of Higher Education. He wrote about extraordinary people in ordinary times, and ordinary people in extraordinary times.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Vector illustration of large open scissors  with several workers in seats dangling by white lines
Iced Out
Duke Administrators Accused of Bypassing Shared-Governance Process in Offering Buyouts
Illustration showing money being funnelled into the top of a microscope.
'A New Era'
Higher-Ed Associations Pitch an Alternative to Trump’s Cap on Research Funding
Illustration showing classical columns of various heights, each turning into a stack of coins
Endowment funds
The Nation’s Wealthiest Small Colleges Just Won a Big Tax Exemption
WASHINGTON, DISTICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES - 2025/04/14: A Pro-Palestinian demonstrator holding a sign with Release Mahmud Khalil written on it, stands in front of the ICE building while joining in a protest. Pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally in front of the ICE building, demanding freedom for Mahmoud Khalil and all those targeted for speaking out against genocide in Palestine. Protesters demand an end to U.S. complicity and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza. (Photo by Probal Rashid/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Campus Activism
An Anonymous Group’s List of Purported Critics of Israel Helped Steer a U.S. Crackdown on Student Activists

From The Review

John T. Scopes as he stood before the judges stand and was sentenced, July 2025.
The Review | Essay
100 Years Ago, the Scopes Monkey Trial Discovered Academic Freedom
By John K. Wilson
Vector illustration of a suited man with a pair of scissors for a tie and an American flag button on his lapel.
The Review | Opinion
A Damaging Endowment Tax Crosses the Finish Line
By Phillip Levine
University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky

Upcoming Events

07-31-Turbulent-Workday_assets v2_Plain.png
Keeping Your Institution Moving Forward in Turbulent Times
Ascendium_Housing_Plain.png
What It Really Takes to Serve Students’ Basic Needs: Housing
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin