IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v165y2022ip1s0960077922009882.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polarization in the three-state q-voter model with anticonformity and bounded confidence

Author

Listed:
  • Lipiecki, Arkadiusz
  • Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna

Abstract

Engaging with dissenting views, fostering productive disagreements or strategic anticonformity can benefit organizations as it challenges the status quo. The question arises, however, whether such strategic anticonformity ultimately leads to social polarization, which is not a desirable phenomenon. We address this question within an agent-based model of discrete choices. Using the way of modeling social responses in continuous opinion models, we propose a three-state q-voter model with anticonformity and bounded confidence. We analyze the model on a complete graph using the mean-field approach and Monte Carlo simulations. We show that strong polarization appears only for a small probability of anticonformity, which means that conformity combined with homophily enhances polarization. Our findings agree with results obtained previously in the group discussion experiment and within various continuous opinion models.

Suggested Citation

  • Lipiecki, Arkadiusz & Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna, 2022. "Polarization in the three-state q-voter model with anticonformity and bounded confidence," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 165(P1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:165:y:2022:i:p1:s0960077922009882
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077922009882
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112809?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Grabisch & Fen Li, 2020. "Anti-conformism in the Threshold Model of Collective Behavior," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 444-477, June.
    2. Takasumi Kurahashi-Nakamura & Michael Mäs & Jan Lorenz, 2016. "Robust Clustering in Generalized Bounded Confidence Models," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(4), pages 1-7.
    3. Biswas, Soumyajyoti & Chatterjee, Arnab & Sen, Parongama, 2012. "Disorder induced phase transition in kinetic models of opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 391(11), pages 3257-3265.
    4. Rainer Hegselmann & Ulrich Krause, 2002. "Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis and Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(3), pages 1-2.
    5. Guillaume Deffuant & Frederic Amblard & Gérard Weisbuch, 2002. "How Can Extremism Prevail? a Study Based on the Relative Agreement Interaction Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(4), pages 1-1.
    6. Pablo Balenzuela & Juan Pablo Pinasco & Viktoriya Semeshenko, 2015. "The Undecided Have the Key: Interaction-Driven Opinion Dynamics in a Three State Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Hans-Ulrich Stark & Claudio J. Tessone & Frank Schweitzer, 2008. "Slower Is Faster: Fostering Consensus Formation By Heterogeneous Inertia," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(04), pages 551-563.
    8. Andreas Flache & Michael Mäs & Thomas Feliciani & Edmund Chattoe-Brown & Guillaume Deffuant & Sylvie Huet & Jan Lorenz, 2017. "Models of Social Influence: Towards the Next Frontiers," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(4), pages 1-2.
    9. Antonio Parravano & Ascensión Andina-Díaz & Miguel A Meléndez-Jiménez, 2016. "Bounded Confidence under Preferential Flip: A Coupled Dynamics of Structural Balance and Opinions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Crokidakis, Nuno, 2014. "A three-state kinetic agent-based model to analyze tax evasion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 414(C), pages 321-328.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wu, Yujia & Guo, Peng, 2024. "Effects of relative homophily and relative heterophily on opinion dynamics in coevolving networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 644(C).
    2. Meng, Fanyuan & Zhu, Jiadong & Yao, Yuheng & Fenoaltea, Enrico Maria & Xie, Yubo & Yang, Pingle & Liu, Run-Ran & Zhang, Jianlin, 2023. "Disagreement and fragmentation in growing groups," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Weimer, Christopher W. & Miller, J.O. & Hill, Raymond R. & Hodson, Douglas D., 2022. "An opinion dynamics model of meta-contrast with continuous social influence forces," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).
    2. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    3. Bruce Edmonds, 2020. "Co-developing beliefs and social influence networks—towards understanding socio-cognitive processes like Brexit," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 491-515, April.
    4. Takesue, Hirofumi, 2023. "Relative opinion similarity leads to the emergence of large clusters in opinion formation models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 622(C).
    5. Maciel, Marcelo V. & Martins, André C.R., 2020. "Ideologically motivated biases in a multiple issues opinion model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 553(C).
    6. Deffuant, Guillaume & Keijzer, Marijn & Banisch, Sven, 2023. "Regular access to constantly renewed online content favors radicalization of opinions," IAST Working Papers 23-154, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    7. Pedraza, Lucía & Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Semeshenko, Viktoriya & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2023. "Mesoscopic analytical approach in a three state opinion model with continuous internal variable," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    8. María Cecilia Gimenez & Luis Reinaudi & Ana Pamela Paz-García & Paulo Marcelo Centres & Antonio José Ramirez-Pastor, 2021. "Opinion evolution in the presence of constant propaganda: homogeneous and localized cases," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 94(1), pages 1-11, January.
    9. Sylvie Huet & Jean-Denis Mathias, 2018. "Few Self-Involved Agents Among Bounded Confidence Agents Can Change Norms," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-27, September.
    10. Gimenez, M. Cecilia & Paz García, Ana Pamela & Burgos Paci, Maxi A. & Reinaudi, Luis, 2016. "Range of interaction in an opinion evolution model of ideological self-positioning: Contagion, hesitance and polarization," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 447(C), pages 320-330.
    11. Francisco J. León-Medina & Jordi Tena-Sánchez & Francisco J. Miguel, 2020. "Fakers becoming believers: how opinion dynamics are shaped by preference falsification, impression management and coherence heuristics," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 385-412, April.
    12. Khalil, Nagi, 2021. "Approach to consensus in models of continuous-opinion dynamics: A study inspired by the physics of granular gases," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 572(C).
    13. Cui, Peng-Bi, 2023. "Exploring the foundation of social diversity and coherence with a novel attraction–repulsion model framework," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 618(C).
    14. George Butler & Gabriella Pigozzi & Juliette Rouchier, 2019. "Mixing Dyadic and Deliberative Opinion Dynamics in an Agent-Based Model of Group Decision-Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-31, August.
    15. Guillaume Deffuant & Ilaria Bertazzi & Sylvie Huet, 2018. "The Dark Side Of Gossips: Hints From A Simple Opinion Dynamics Model," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-20, September.
    16. G Jordan Maclay & Moody Ahmad, 2021. "An agent based force vector model of social influence that predicts strong polarization in a connected world," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-42, November.
    17. Kononovicius, Aleksejus, 2021. "Supportive interactions in the noisy voter model," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    18. Wander Jager & Frédéric Amblard, 2005. "Uniformity, Bipolarization and Pluriformity Captured as Generic Stylized Behavior with an Agent-Based Simulation Model of Attitude Change," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 295-303, January.
    19. Gabbay, Michael, 2007. "The effects of nonlinear interactions and network structure in small group opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 378(1), pages 118-126.
    20. Deffuant, Guillaume & Roubin, Thibaut, 2023. "Emergence of group hierarchy," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 611(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:165:y:2022:i:p1:s0960077922009882. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thayer, Thomas R. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/chaos-solitons-and-fractals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.