International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation Volume 9 2026 80
loyalty into cultic cohesion. Repeated exposure deepens
these attachments until parasocial bonds resemble
quasi-religious devotion. These dynamics transform
parasociality from a benign media phenomenon into
a mechanism of radicalization, particularly when
scarcity primes individuals for dependence.
Integrating Scarcity, Parasociality, and Digital
Belonging
Scarcity interacts powerfully with digital systems,
transforming individual vulnerability into a process
of collective radicalization (Diagram 2). When people
experience scarcity—whether economic, informational,
or social—it places their minds in a state of heightened
threat sensitivity and narrowed attention, reducing
their ability to process complexity and increasing their
reliance on simple, emotionally charged explanations
(Mani et al., 2013). In this environment, parasocial
figures—charismatic influencers, online personalities,
or even anonymous symbolic leaders—step in to fill the
void. These figures provide not only emotional comfort
but also clear, seemingly authoritative interpretations
of the world, giving individuals a sense of stability amid
perceived chaos. The digital environment is where these
forces converge. Through algorithmic reinforcement,
users are repeatedly shown content that aligns with
their preexisting fears and beliefs, gradually limiting
their exposure to alternative perspectives (Beam, 2014
Tufekci, 2015). This constricting exposure creates
tightly sealed informational environments, or echo
chambers, where opposing viewpoints are excluded,
and the same ideas are amplified until they feel
unquestionable.
Inside these algorithmic echo chambers, online
communities emerge that do more than share
information they provide belonging. Social validation,
shared rituals (such as coordinated posting or decoding
messages), and continuous interaction convert
individual beliefs into a collective identity (Marwick &
Lewis, 2017). Over time, this process reshapes scarcity-
driven alienation into a form of digital cultic belonging
that is emotionally intense, cognitively closed to outside
evidence, and reinforced by constant social feedback.
Research on digital extremism shows that this process
is self-reinforcing because scarcity primes exclusionary
thinking (Krosch &Amodio, 2014). Parasocial
attachments supply charismatic authority (Giles,
2002), and networked online communities normalize
radical worldviews (Marwick &Lewis, 2017). This
loop transforms scarcity from a personal experience
into a collective identity, binding individuals into a
cult-like digital movement.
Diagram 2: Scarcity → Parasociality → Algorithmic →
Digital Cult Belonging Model
Additional Theoretical Connections
Scarcity does not operate in isolation. It interacts
with a network of psychological and technological
mechanisms that together create the architecture of
modern radicalization. Algorithmic amplification
illustrates how platform recommendation systems,

81
Zahra Choudhury |Scarcity as Latent Architecture
such as on YouTube or TikTok, exploit informational
scarcity by funneling users toward ideologically
congruent content, reinforcing confirmation bias, and
creating closed epistemic loops (Beam, 2014 Tufekci,
2015). This process transforms personal anxiety
into socially validated group beliefs, with research
suggesting that scarcity heightens susceptibility to these
algorithmically constructed echo chambers. Similarly,
social identity theory (Tajfel &Turner, 1979) highlights
how material or symbolic deprivation triggers defensive
in-group cohesion. Online communities act as “identity
sanctuaries,” validating scarcity-framed grievances and
rewarding conformity with status, while deepening
hostility toward perceived out-groups.
Moral panic further amplifies these effects by
reframing diffuse economic or social scarcity into
moralized threats, such as elites or immigrants, which
cultic movements exploit to position themselves as
custodians of order and clarity (Cohen, 2011). Under
such conditions, memetic transmission serves as a
cognitive shortcut: simplified, emotionally charged
cultural units spread virally, reducing cognitive load
for scarcity-primed individuals and converting anxiety
into symbolically resonant ideological cues (Phillips
&Milner, 2017). Finally, in a hyper-capitalist context,
belief itself becomes a commodity, with cults and
extremist movements operating like brands, offering
identity “subscriptions,” manufacturing symbolic
scarcity through “exclusive” insider truths, and
punishing defection to maintain loyalty (Lindstrom,
2011 Godin, 2018). Together, these mechanisms
demonstrate how scarcity functions not as a single
variable but as a structural condition that binds
psychological vulnerability to digital infrastructure,
intensifying the shift from deprivation to radicalization.
Neuroscience reinforces these insights. Under scarcity,
neural processing shifts from reflective reasoning to
threat-driven reactivity, making individuals more
emotionally volatile and susceptible to manipulation
(Mani et al., 2013). Emotional contagion in digital
networks then amplifies these vulnerabilities,
transforming isolated fear into collective outrage
(Brady et al., 2017). Finally, platform gamification
exploits these dynamics by manufacturing artificial
scarcity through likes, shares, and algorithmic rewards,
further conditioning individuals to seek meaning and
affirmation within closed systems (Zuboff, 2019).
Beyond material and informational scarcity, ecological
scarcity is becoming a prominent driver of fear-based
group formation. Climate change, environmental
degradation, and resource collapse have been linked
to rising anxiety and the emergence of doomsday-
oriented groups, including eco-fascist movements that
weaponize environmental concerns for ideological
recruitment (Hoffman &Sandelands, 2005).
Figure 3: Scarcity as Latent Architecture Linking Psychological and Digital Mechanisms A
layered systems model depicting scarcity as the underlying “ecological substrate”