IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chsofr/v73y2015icp98-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evidential opinion dynamics model based on heterogeneous social influential power

Author

Listed:
  • Lu, Xi
  • Mo, Hongming
  • Deng, Yong

Abstract

This paper introduces an evidential opinion dynamics model combing Dempster–Shafer evidence theory to explore the opinion evolution. Our model is an improvement of the Continuous Opinions and Discrete Actions (CODA) model. The process of people updating their opinions is regarded as a decision making process. The unavoidable uncertainty of the opinion evolution is handled by Dempster–Shafer evidence theory. Thereby, a new opinion group, i.e.the neutrals, is introduced into the system. Simulations show the neutral group plays a significant part in the opinion evolution. An opinion ice-breaking process at the early stage of the opinion evolution is observed. It is found that the consensus is not always reached then clusters emerge instead, which depends on the proportions of supporters, neutrals and opponents. The individual’s influential power is taken into account. With the positive feedback mechanism of people’s influential power, the obtained results are in accordance with people’s daily cognition such as the Authority Effect and the Matthew Effect. The final influential power distribution of all individuals in our model presents power-law characteristic.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu, Xi & Mo, Hongming & Deng, Yong, 2015. "An evidential opinion dynamics model based on heterogeneous social influential power," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 98-107.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:chsofr:v:73:y:2015:i:c:p:98-107
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2015.01.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077915000089
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chaos.2015.01.007?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. Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron & Józef Sznajd, 2000. "Opinion Evolution In Closed Community," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(06), pages 1157-1165.
    2. Martins, André C.R. & Pereira, Carlos de B. & Vicente, Renato, 2009. "An opinion dynamics model for the diffusion of innovations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 388(15), pages 3225-3232.
    3. C.R. Martins, André, 2014. "Discrete opinion models as a limit case of the CODA model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 395(C), pages 352-357.
    4. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    5. Diao, Su-Meng & Liu, Yun & Zeng, Qing-An & Luo, Gui-Xun & Xiong, Fei, 2014. "A novel opinion dynamics model based on expanded observation ranges and individuals’ social influences in social networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 415(C), pages 220-228.
    6. Yu-Song Tu & A. O. Sousa & Ling-Jiang Kong & Mu-Ren Liu, 2005. "Sznajd Model With Synchronous Updating On Complex Networks," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(07), pages 1149-1161.
    7. 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.
    8. Galam, Serge, 2004. "Sociophysics: a personal testimony," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 336(1), pages 49-55.
    9. Guillaume Deffuant & David Neau & Frederic Amblard & Gérard Weisbuch, 2000. "Mixing beliefs among interacting agents," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01n04), pages 87-98.
    10. Galam, Serge, 1999. "Application of statistical physics to politics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 132-139.
    11. Malcolm J. Beynon, 2006. "The Role of the DS/AHP in Identifying Inter-Group Alliances and Majority Rule Within Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 21-42, January.
    12. Wei, Daijun & Deng, Xinyang & Zhang, Xiaoge & Deng, Yong & Mahadevan, Sankaran, 2013. "Identifying influential nodes in weighted networks based on evidence theory," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(10), pages 2564-2575.
    13. Albert-László Barabási, 2005. "The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics," Nature, Nature, vol. 435(7039), pages 207-211, May.
    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. Oliveira, Igor V.G. & Wang, Chao & Dong, Gaogao & Du, Ruijin & Fiore, Carlos E. & Vilela, André L.M. & Stanley, H. Eugene, 2024. "Entropy production on cooperative opinion dynamics," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Liu, Yang & Wei, Bo & Du, Yuxian & Xiao, Fuyuan & Deng, Yong, 2016. "Identifying influential spreaders by weight degree centrality in complex networks," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-7.

    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. Diao, Su-Meng & Liu, Yun & Zeng, Qing-An & Luo, Gui-Xun & Xiong, Fei, 2014. "A novel opinion dynamics model based on expanded observation ranges and individuals’ social influences in social networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 415(C), pages 220-228.
    2. Quanbo Zha & Gang Kou & Hengjie Zhang & Haiming Liang & Xia Chen & Cong-Cong Li & Yucheng Dong, 2020. "Opinion dynamics in finance and business: a literature review and research opportunities," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Calvelli, Matheus & Crokidakis, Nuno & Penna, Thadeu J.P., 2019. "Phase transitions and universality in the Sznajd model with anticonformity," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 513(C), pages 518-523.
    4. Martins, André C.R., 2022. "Extremism definitions in opinion dynamics models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).
    5. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2016. "Opinion evolution influenced by informed agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 431-441.
    6. Tiwari, Mukesh & Yang, Xiguang & Sen, Surajit, 2021. "Modeling the nonlinear effects of opinion kinematics in elections: A simple Ising model with random field based study," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 582(C).
    7. Catherine A. Glass & David H. Glass, 2021. "Social Influence of Competing Groups and Leaders in Opinion Dynamics," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 58(3), pages 799-823, October.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2015. "Emergence and spread of extremist opinions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 436(C), pages 87-97.
    11. 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.
    12. Deng, Lei & Liu, Yun & Xiong, Fei, 2013. "An opinion diffusion model with clustered early adopters," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(17), pages 3546-3554.
    13. Mehrdad Agha Mohammad Ali Kermani & Reza Ghesmati & Masoud Jalayer, 2018. "Opinion-Aware Influence Maximization: How To Maximize A Favorite Opinion In A Social Network?," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-27, September.
    14. Si, Xia-Meng & Wang, Wen-Dong & Ma, Yan, 2016. "Role of propagation thresholds in sentiment-based model of opinion evolution with information diffusion," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 451(C), pages 549-559.
    15. Karataieva, Tatiana & Koshmanenko, Volodymyr & Krawczyk, Małgorzata J. & Kułakowski, Krzysztof, 2019. "Mean field model of a game for power," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 525(C), pages 535-547.
    16. Benjamin Cabrera & Björn Ross & Daniel Röchert & Felix Brünker & Stefan Stieglitz, 2021. "The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1331-1355, November.
    17. Qian, Shen & Liu, Yijun & Galam, Serge, 2015. "Activeness as a key to counter democratic balance," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 432(C), pages 187-196.
    18. Melatagia Yonta, Paulin & Ndoundam, René, 2009. "Opinion dynamics using majority functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 223-244, March.
    19. Han, Wenchen & Gao, Shun & Huang, Changwei & Yang, Junzhong, 2022. "Non-consensus states in circular opinion model with repulsive interaction," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 585(C).
    20. Zhu, Jiefan & Yao, Yiping & Tang, Wenjie & Zhang, Haoming, 2022. "An agent-based model of opinion dynamics with attitude-hiding behaviors," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 603(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:73:y:2015:i:c:p:98-107. 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.