This study offers a novel perspective by framing affective polarization, an emotional divide marked by hostility, distrust, and prejudicial attitudes toward perceived out-groups, as an informal learning process. Informal learning here refers to self-directed, interest-driven learning embedded in everyday activity, occurring without formal instruction or external assessment. While affective polarization is often treated as a byproduct of ideological conflict or misinformation, this research reveals how users on social media learn to engage, interpret, and perform identities through emotionally charged, polarized interactions. Using Netnography, this study analyzes a Facebook animal rights campaign to explore how platform design and user behavior shape public discourse, identity performance, and emotional expression. This adaptive method offers a reflexive, culturally grounded lens on how platform affordances and user agency influence communication. Users engage in polarized debates and co-construct “us vs. them” distinctions, reinforcing collective identity and emotional loyalty. Rather than simply expressing opinions, they perform moral identities through declarations, reaction tools, and exclusionary language. These behaviors constitute a collective, iterative learning process wherein emotional expression becomes a key mode of participation and identity performance.

The study is guided by the following research questions to explore this phenomenon:(1) How do social media features and user behaviors reinforce emotional biases and negative perceptions of opposing viewpoints in online discourse?(2) In what ways are “us versus them” narratives constructed, enacted, and sustained within polarized communities?(3) Which platform affordances and discursive strategies empower or pressure possibilities for resistance, negotiation, and more nuanced or empathetic forms of engagement?

Thematic analysis yielded five central themes that illustrate how affective polarization unfolds in practice:(1) the affirmation of group identity,(2) the use of emotive and moralizing language,(3) the prevalence of defensive and resistant communication strategies,(4) patterns of antagonistic engagement, and(5) platform affordances that amplify emotional validation at the expense of reflective discourse.

These findings demonstrate that polarization is not merely an ideological divide but a socially reinforced and technologically structured phenomenon. Echo chambers form through algorithmic curation and feedback loops that reward emotional or hostile rhetoric. Users learn to navigate these dynamics by prioritizing quick alignment over deliberative dialogue. This research contributes to ongoing digital literacy and education discussions by showing how emotional engagement and platform design influence learning and public discourse. Existing frameworks often focus on misinformation or critical thinking but neglect online interaction’s affective and performative dimensions. This study advocates a broader model of critical digital literacy, including emotional awareness, recognition of affective manipulation, and space for reflective engagement. By conceptualizing affective polarization as a form of informal, technologically mediated learning, this study offers insight into the intersection of emotion, identity, and knowledge in digital life, with implications for pedagogical design, inclusive dialogue, and the future of democratic online spaces.