Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study investigated the linguistic construction of the Israel–Palestine conflict on Ekşi Sözlük, one of Türkiye’s most prominent online forums. Despite the intense political salience of the conflict, empirical research on how ordinary citizens express their stance, emotion, and national identity in digital environments remained limited. To address this gap, we conducted a computational mixed-methods analysis combining manual stance coding with psycholinguistic tools (LIWC-22) and Narrative Arc modeling. The dataset consisted of 600 manually verified entries collected from three purposively selected threads representing divergent viewpoints. The results revealed distinct psychological profiles. pro-Israel entries exhibited high analytic thinking (M = 57.15) but low authenticity (M = 43.04). This combination suggested a detached, bureaucratic effort to rationalize state violence through a strategy of "cold cognition." In contrast, pro-Palestinian entries showed lower levels of analytic processing. Furthermore, this group recorded the highest social confidence (Clout) (M = 75.32), signaling a strong collective moral stance. Finally, Neutral entries were characterized by the highest authenticity (M = 48.52), focusing on economic self-interest as a "secular-nationalist firewall" against the conflict. These findings illustrated how political stance shaped deep cognitive styles in the Turkish digital sphere.
Karadağlı et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: