IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v491y2024ics0304380024000619.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contagion, fast and low: Modeling social influence in socio-ecological systems

Author

Listed:
  • Lopolito, Antonio
  • Caferra, Rocco
  • Morone, Piergiuseppe

Abstract

The concept of contagion defines how attitudes, emotions, or behaviors spread within a specific group. Traditional models of social contagion account for network characteristics that define the spread of simple or complex ideas based on the degree of exposure of susceptible agents to their affected “contact neighborhood”. However, these models understate two principal characteristics of real-world dynamics: (i) the competition among ideas of varying degrees of complexity (as observed in voting models) and (ii) the feedback-driven evolution of contagion complexity. Certain network features (e.g., network size, topology, neighborhood size) might favor the diffusion of competing simple or complex ideas, depending on their distinct characteristics. Furthermore, the dominant behavior disseminated may alter the agent’s operational environment, thereby modifying the cost of influencing additional agents. For instance, in co-evolutionary games such as the tragedy of the commons, encouraging agents to collaborate in the context of abundant and untapped resources requires a costly and complex contagion; conversely, in situations of resource depletion, prompting agents to reduce excessive exploitation is less costly—in line with the pathway of simple contagion. In this report, we develop an agent-based model that incorporates all of these aspects.

Suggested Citation

  • Lopolito, Antonio & Caferra, Rocco & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2024. "Contagion, fast and low: Modeling social influence in socio-ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 491(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:491:y:2024:i:c:s0304380024000619
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2024.110673
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380024000619
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2024.110673?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. Dimant, Eugen, 2015. "On Peer Effects: Behavioral Contagion of (Un)Ethical Behavior and the Role of Social Identity," MPRA Paper 68732, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Güth Werner & Kliemt Hartmut & Peleg Bezalel, 2000. "Co-evolution of Preferences and Information in Simple Games of Trust," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 83-110, February.
    3. Rabinowitz, George & Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, 1989. "A Directional Theory of Issue Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 93-121, March.
    4. Cassar, Alessandra, 2007. "Coordination and cooperation in local, random and small world networks: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 209-230, February.
    5. Nickerson, David W., 2008. "Is Voting Contagious? Evidence from Two Field Experiments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 49-57, February.
    6. Brian Beckage & Frances C. Moore & Katherine Lacasse, 2022. "Incorporating human behaviour into Earth system modelling," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(11), pages 1493-1502, November.
    7. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    8. Wang, Tao & Huang, Keke & Cheng, Yuan & Zheng, Xiaoping, 2015. "Understanding herding based on a co-evolutionary model for strategy and game structure," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 84-90.
    9. Dimant, Eugen, 2019. "Contagion of pro- and anti-social behavior among peers and the role of social proximity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 66-88.
    10. Susan Clayton & Patrick Devine-Wright & Paul C. Stern & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Amanda Carrico & Linda Steg & Janet Swim & Mirilia Bonnes, 2015. "Psychological research and global climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 640-646, July.
    11. Noel Castree & William M. Adams & John Barry & Daniel Brockington & Bram Büscher & Esteve Corbera & David Demeritt & Rosaleen Duffy & Ulrike Felt & Katja Neves & Peter Newell & Luigi Pellizzoni & Kate, 2014. "Changing the intellectual climate," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(9), pages 763-768, September.
    12. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    13. William D. Nordhaus, 1975. "The Political Business Cycle," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(2), pages 169-190.
    14. Verma, Gunjan & Swami, Ananthram & Chan, Kevin, 2014. "The impact of competing zealots on opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 395(C), pages 310-331.
    15. Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Spatial Models of Party Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(2), pages 368-377, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Linek, Maximilian & Traxler, Christian, 2021. "Framing and social information nudges at Wikipedia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1269-1279.
    2. Gómez, Patricia & Shaikh, Nazrul I. & Erkoc, Murat, 2024. "Continuous improvement in the efficient use of energy in office buildings through peers effects," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 360(C).
    3. Bolton, Gary & Dimant, Eugen & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2021. "Observability and social image: On the robustness and fragility of reciprocity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 946-964.
    4. Eugen Dimant & Tobias Gesche, 2021. "Nudging Enforcers: How Norm Perceptions and Motives for Lying Shape Sanctions," CESifo Working Paper Series 9385, CESifo.
    5. Mitra, Arnab & Shahriar, Quazi, 2020. "Why is dishonesty difficult to mitigate? The interaction between descriptive norm and monetary incentive," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Astrid Dannenberg & Gunnar Gutsche & Marlene Batzke & Sven Christens & Daniel Engler & Fabian Mankat & Sophia Moeller & Eva Weingaertner & Andreas Ernst & Marcel Lumkowsky & Georg von Wangenheim & Ger, 2022. "The effects of norms on environmental behavior," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202219, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    7. Grieder, Manuel & Schmitz, Jan & Schubert, Renate, 2024. "Asking to give: coordinated fundraising and giving," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302438, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Dannenberg, Astrid & Diekert, Florian & Händel, Philipp, 2022. "The effects of social information and luck on risk behavior of small-scale fishers at Lake Victoria," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    9. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant, 2022. "Nudging with care: the risks and benefits of social information," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(3), pages 443-464, June.
    10. Florian Diekert & Tillmann Eymess & Joseph Luomba & Israel Waichman, 2022. "The Creation of Social Norms under Weak Institutions," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(6), pages 1127-1160.
    11. Carolin V. Zorell, 2020. "Nudges, Norms, or Just Contagion? A Theory on Influences on the Practice of (Non-)Sustainable Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Benjamin Ouvrard & Anne Stenger, 2017. "Nudging with heterogeneity in terms of environmental sensitivity : a public goods experiment in networks," Working Papers of BETA 2017-36, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    13. Isaac Duerr & Thomas Knight & Lindsey Woodworth, 2019. "Evidence on the Effect of Political Platform Transparency on Partisan Voting," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 331-349, June.
    14. Heather Hodges & Colin Kuehl & Sarah E. Anderson & Phillip J. Ehret & Cameron Brick, 2020. "How Managers Can Reduce Household Water Use Through Communication: A Field Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1076-1099, September.
    15. David Jimenez-Gomez, 2021. "Social Pressure in Networks Induces Public Good Provision," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Lillemo, Shuling Chen, 2014. "Measuring the effect of procrastination and environmental awareness on households' energy-saving behaviours: An empirical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 249-256.
    17. Peter Bergman, 2020. "Nudging Technology Use: Descriptive and Experimental Evidence from School Information Systems," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(4), pages 623-647, Fall.
    18. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    19. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    20. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Tu, Gengyang, 2020. "Conveyance, envy, and homeowner choice of appliances," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(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:ecomod:v:491:y:2024:i:c:s0304380024000619. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.