Literature DB >> 33446774

Stochastic events can explain sustained clustering and polarisation of opinions in social networks.

Scott A Condie1,2, Corrine M Condie3,4.   

Abstract

Understanding the processes underlying development and persistence of polarised opinions has been one of the key challenges in social networks for more than two decades. While plausible mechanisms have been suggested, they assume quite specialised interactions between individuals or groups that may only be relevant in particular contexts. We propose that a more broadly relevant explanation might be associated with the influence of external events. An agent-based bounded-confidence model has been used to demonstrate persistent polarisation of opinions within populations exposed to stochastic events (of positive and negative influence) even when all interactions between individuals are noisy and assimilative. Events can have a large impact on the distribution of opinions because their influence acts synchronistically across a large proportion of the population, whereas an individual can only interact with small numbers of other individuals at any particular time.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33446774      PMCID: PMC7809277          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80353-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  8 in total

Review 1.  Attitude change: persuasion and social influence.

Authors:  W Wood
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 24.137

2.  Advice Taking in Decision Making: Egocentric Discounting and Reputation Formation.

Authors: 
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  2000-11

3.  Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks.

Authors:  Sinan Aral; Dylan Walker
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Modeling Echo Chambers and Polarization Dynamics in Social Networks.

Authors:  Fabian Baumann; Philipp Lorenz-Spreen; Igor M Sokolov; Michele Starnini
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 9.161

5.  Individualization as driving force of clustering phenomena in humans.

Authors:  Michael Mäs; Andreas Flache; Dirk Helbing
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-10-21       Impact factor: 4.475

6.  Differentiation without distancing. explaining bi-polarization of opinions without negative influence.

Authors:  Michael Mäs; Andreas Flache
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The social physics collective.

Authors:  Matjaž Perc
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Social influence and the collective dynamics of opinion formation.

Authors:  Mehdi Moussaïd; Juliane E Kämmer; Pantelis P Analytis; Hansjörg Neth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  Polarization and tipping points.

Authors:  Michael W Macy; Manqing Ma; Daniel R Tabin; Jianxi Gao; Boleslaw K Szymanski
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 12.779

2.  A general framework to link theory and empirics in opinion formation models.

Authors:  Ivan V Kozitsin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 4.996

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.