An echo chamber is an information environment where the same viewpoints are repeated and amplified while alternatives are filtered out. It forms through a mix of human habits—like seeking confirmation, avoiding conflict, and trusting familiar voices—and platform design, where algorithms prioritize content that matches your past clicks and your social circle’s tastes. Over time, the stream narrows: sources converge, language hardens, and opposing evidence becomes rare or framed as illegitimate.

Echo chambers don’t just skew what people believe; they also change what feels normal. Repetition creates a false sense of consensus, pushes opinions toward the extremes, and raises the social cost of asking skeptical questions. The effect shows up on the left and the right, in politics and beyond, and it isn’t only online—friend groups, workplaces, and media brands can all become reinforcing loops.

Breaking an echo chamber doesn’t mean “both-sidesing” everything; it means restoring exposure, evidence, and accountability. That’s why EchoChamberExperiment tracks articles at the author level: diverse sourcing, cross-ideological citations, clear corrections, and measured language are signals of a healthier information diet. The goal isn’t to shame or endorse—it’s to surface patterns you can verify, so readers can judge the work on its merits rather than the volume of the echo.