However, Sunstein (2001) argues that, in practice, the modal outcome of
enclave deliberation is group polarization, which represents a “breeding ground
for extremism” (p. 71) and “may even put social stability at risk” (p. 77). His
concern here is that, “through the mechanisms of social
inﬂuence and
persuasive arguments, members will move to positions that lack merit.” This
could happen either because the homogeneity of the group restricts the size of
the argument pool or because individuals will be more likely to voice a popular
opinion within the group in order to obtain the approval of as many members as
possible. The existence of these two mechanisms has been demonstrated in
a number of lab experiments that show that individuals who participate in
homogeneous discussion groups tend to adopt more extreme positions after
deliberating with their like-minded peers (see, e.g., Myers and Lamm 1976). In
contrast, diverse groups tend to perform better in solving problems even if the
Social_Media_and_Democracy