Order, Loyalty, and Polarization in a Public Debate: Evidence from a Russian-Language Online Experiment

We examine how presentation order structures polarization in a public debate. A large online debate on a proposed “Ministry of Happiness” is analyzed. The data for analysis was obtained from a two-stage experiment in which 307 (Stage 1) and then 200 (Stage 2) respondents from different age groups evaluated 50 basic and 10 additional statements about the creation of a “Ministry of Happiness.” The contribution is a sequence-aware, audience-referenced reading of the same script. We trace how alignment with loyal or disloyal framing accumulates over the observed order, recover age-ordered cohorts directly from response patterns, rank the most divisive statements, and quantify sign-free responsiveness by age and gender. In terms of age categories, youth initially respond to statements about benefits and feasibility, though they quickly adjust after scrutiny or signs of distrust, ultimately receiving lower ratings when critical moments arise. Mid-life splits into a trust-forward profile and an oversight-oriented profile. The oldest cohort holds early, then declines in long negative runs. Polarization concentrates on a compact set of identity, control, and feasibility statements, with a sharp pivot at a mid-sequence trust cue. In the older module, women react more decisively than men at the same ages. The approach is descriptive and transparent, identifies where and for whom polarization accumulates, and is portable to other debates.