Are you thinking what I’m thinking?
Thought contagion in the digital age and a case for serendipity
A few weeks ago, feeling somewhat overwhelmed, I sought refuge in a familiar haven — books. Manoeuvring past the bustling crowds and cabs of SoHo, I arrived at Foyles, a towering five-story bookstore in the heart of London. Surprisingly, the demanding noise of the world seemed unable to penetrate its walls. Inside, a profound, almost tangible silence prevailed, intensified by the late hour — it was past 8 pm, leaving just the cashier, about a dozen others, and myself. With the bookstore understaffed and quiet, I was left to my own devices to navigate the aisles. This unguided wandering led me through endless shelves lined with titles unknown to me, each brushing past me like a stranger — our shoulders briefly touching.
I’ve been thinking a lot about serendipity recently, especially its scarcity in our streamlined, digital lives. Had I simply logged online with a specific book in mind, I would never have stumbled upon the eclectic collection that I brought home that evening. This incident prompted a reflection:
In our pursuit of digital efficiency, are we losing the chance for unexpected encounters that might challenge, enrich, or unsettle us, demanding our thoughtful engagement over time? ;
How can we redesign our online environments to support serendipitous exploration better?
During my recent travels, I observed a striking cultural convergence despite geographical distances — similar fashion trends, identical Netflix series trending worldwide, and even the same books appearing in the hands of commuters. The New Yorker columnist Kyle Chayka writes on this cultural homogenisation, the ‘death of taste’, and why apps make physically independent places increasingly similar and create a sense of (curated and artificial) familiarity. Certainly, trends and influences are neither entirely negative nor novel.
Despite the internet’s borderless nature and the enhanced connectivity provided by apps, the algorithms that favor popular content foster a cycle of mainstream material. This not only risks the loss of unique, avant-garde expression but also makes it unlikely that we’ll stumble upon — much less patiently engage with — such challenging or unconventional content in the first place. Lack of content isn’t the issue; rather, the troubling aspect is our limited exposure to diverse expressions. Indeed, this article suggests that by “optimising for engagement, many social media feeds push us towards pieces of culture that are more Western, ambient, empty, cheap, and ephemeral”. Put differently, we risk leaving content that could propel us forward to die a silent death by the algorithm.
The contagiousness of thoughts
If we take this a step further, we must consider how our trend-driven and viral culture might be shaping our beliefs and actions more profoundly than we realise. As a social psychologist studying the dynamics of social influence, particularly within the realm of misinformation, I am particularly drawn to the concept of ‘thought contagion’. Social contagion theory suggests that our attitudes, emotions, and behaviours spread through our social networks, from direct interactions to digital exchanges, leading us to conform to those around us. While this may seem innocuous when it involves watching the ‘must-see’ movie of the year or finally getting a pair of Birkenstocks, the implications become more serious when considering conformity to societal stances on issues like health regulations, voting, or democratic values. This study showed that when the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage was presented as likely, it shifted perceived norms and personal attitudes toward increased support for same-sex marriage and LGBTQ+ communities. That is, institutional decisions can signal shifts in social norms, prompting individuals to adjust their stances accordingly.
Does the homogeneous information landscape we often perceive as normative affect what we think, believe, and how we behave?
Some recent research I was involved in discovered a pervasive, existential fatigue across Europe — a deep erosion of societal trust, a sense of invisibility within political landscapes, and a questioning of the efficacy of individual actions. This scepticism, while often justified, risks leading us down a path of complacency and learned helplessness — a state where individuals, repeatedly encountering uncontrollable events, come to believe they are powerless, ceasing efforts even when they can effect change. I would argue that in the continuous stream of engaging yet trivial content, our overwhelmingly predictable and saturated internet significantly contributes to these sentiments. We find ourselves trapped in a cycle of moral outrage, only to be abruptly disrupted — or perhaps, conveniently soothed — by the next amusing cat video.
Serendipity as the antidote
How can we counteract the pervasive sense of distrust and helplessness permeating our society, and how do we foster and strengthen the belief in our own agency and impact? Research suggests that curious and optimistic individuals tend to seek out new information more open-mindedly. This leads to an intriguing possibility: Could this effect be inverted, where serendipity itself fosters a curious and open mindset? Indeed, studies find that positive, unexpected experiences can make us more optimistic and open-minded. I propose that serendipity might serve as a catalyst for cognitive flexibility, help break confirmation biases, foster intellectual humility, and promote empathy and social cohesion. How, then, can we design online environments that naturally incorporate chance, optimism, and hope into their fabric?
While I don’t have all the answers, I have ideas to bring randomness and joy back to our online spaces:
Craft algorithms that break the mould by injecting randomness into content feeds, disrupting user echo chambers. This approach broadens perspectives and surfaces a wider array of content, challenging conventional browsing habits.
Promote a customisable experience through a dynamic marketplace of algorithms, enabling users to actively shape how they discover and engage with content. This empowers users to manage their digital experiences, ensuring a richer and more personal interaction with media (see algorithmic choice).
Develop ‘digital serendipity zones’ within platforms dedicated to serendipitous content discovery. These zones could challenge users’ expectations by presenting them with content that diverges from their usual interests.
Design ‘cross-pollination’ features that encourage the mixing of diverse content streams and user interactions across different topics and communities to foster dialogues and unexpected communal learning.
Perhaps these offer possible initial steps toward redesigning our online environments to better reflect the serendipitous experiences we value in the physical world. Just like when I would roam through the local library as a child. Back then, there were no curated lists of must-read books from The New Yorker, no Netflix adaptations, and no relentless recommendations on Instagram to sway my choices. I wandered through the aisles, and somehow, the right book always seemed to find me — serendipitously.
Note: This piece was originally shared on Medium, where future pieces will be published on. Join us!