IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/phsmap/v535y2019ics0378437119313731.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Irrational behavior in the adoption of innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Laguna, M.F.
  • Iglesias, J.R.
  • Gonçalves, Sebastián

Abstract

Classical Economics Theories mostly assume that consumer decisions are made based on rational evaluation according to the utility of a given good. Following this idea, most of the studies on the adoption of technological innovations suppose some kind of rationality behind the individual’s decisions. Here, we choose a different point of view and address the role of non-rational agents in the dynamics of the adoption of innovations in a simple agent-based model. We consider three kind of non-rational agents: oniomaniacs, impulsive buyers, and flickers. Oniomaniacs are people suffering a compulsion to buy novelties, impulsive buyers are persons acting on the impel of the moment, and flickers are agents that impulsively change its adoption status, whatever it is. In our model, such agents coexist with rational individuals who follow adoption rules determined mainly by three elements: the appeal of the novelty, the inertia or resistance to adopt it, and the interaction with other agents. In order to account for societies with different idiosyncrasies, two different distributions of the agent’s inertia have been considered. Moreover, the model incorporates the possibility of repentance and allows two type of rational agents, called mimetic and contrarians. We analyze the effect of non-rational agents in the dynamics of adoption and find that they increase the speed of the adoption process. Moreover, a few impulsive buyers are enough to produce total adoption and neutralize the role of contrarians. We also find that the interplay between flickers and repentants brings new features in the adoption final states, which have a non obvious dependence with the parameters of the model. The non-rational agents considered here produce non-linear effects in the dynamics of adoption, making it more realistic when compared with our previous models.

Suggested Citation

  • Laguna, M.F. & Iglesias, J.R. & Gonçalves, Sebastián, 2019. "Irrational behavior in the adoption of innovations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 535(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:phsmap:v:535:y:2019:i:c:s0378437119313731
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2019.122388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437119313731
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only. Journal offers the option of making the article available online on Science direct for a fee of $3,000
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.physa.2019.122388?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. Sebastian Goncalves & M. F. Laguna & J. R. Iglesias, 2012. "Why, when, and how fast innovations are adopted," Papers 1208.2589, arXiv.org.
    2. Serge Galam, 2008. "Sociophysics: A Review Of Galam Models," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 409-440.
    3. Gordon, Mirta B. & Laguna, M.F. & Gonçalves, S. & Iglesias, J.R., 2017. "Adoption of innovations with contrarian agents and repentance," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 486(C), pages 192-205.
    4. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    5. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    6. Galam, Serge, 2004. "Contrarian deterministic effects on opinion dynamics: “the hung elections scenario”," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 333(C), pages 453-460.
    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. 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.
    2. Gordon, Mirta B. & Laguna, M.F. & Gonçalves, S. & Iglesias, J.R., 2017. "Adoption of innovations with contrarian agents and repentance," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 486(C), pages 192-205.
    3. Serge Galam, 2016. "The invisible hand and the rational agent are behind bubbles and crashes," Papers 1601.02990, arXiv.org.
    4. Javarone, Marco Alberto, 2016. "An evolutionary strategy based on partial imitation for solving optimization problems," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 463(C), pages 262-269.
    5. Andrea Ellero & Annamaria Sorato & Giovanni Fasano, 2011. "A new model for estimating the probability of information spreading with opinion leaders," Working Papers 13, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    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. 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.
    8. Agnieszka Kowalska-Styczeń & Krzysztof Malarz, 2020. "Noise induced unanimity and disorder in opinion formation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Khalil, Nagi & Toral, Raúl, 2019. "The noisy voter model under the influence of contrarians," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 515(C), pages 81-92.
    10. Marco Alberto Javarone & Daniele Marinazzo, 2018. "Dilution of Ferromagnets via a Random Graph-Based Strategy," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-11, April.
    11. F. Jacobs & S. Galam, 2019. "Two-Opinions-Dynamics Generated By Inflexibles And Non-Contrarian And Contrarian Floaters," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(04), pages 1-30, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Galam, Serge, 2016. "The invisible hand and the rational agent are behind bubbles and crashes," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 209-217.
    14. Chorus, Caspar G., 2015. "Models of moral decision making: Literature review and research agenda for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 69-85.
    15. Chakrabarti, Anindya S., 2016. "Cross-correlation patterns in social opinion formation with sequential data," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 442-454.
    16. Gimenez, M.C. & Revelli, J.A. & Lama, M.S. de la & Lopez, J.M. & Wio, H.S., 2013. "Interplay between social debate and propaganda in an opinion formation model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(1), pages 278-286.
    17. Li, Bin-Quan & Wu, Zhi-Xi & Guan, Jian-Yue, 2022. "Alternating rotation of coordinated and anti-coordinated action due to environmental feedback and noise," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    18. Aleksejus Kononovicius, 2017. "Empirical Analysis and Agent-Based Modeling of the Lithuanian Parliamentary Elections," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-15, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Galam, Serge, 2011. "Collective beliefs versus individual inflexibility: The unavoidable biases of a public debate," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(17), pages 3036-3054.

    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:phsmap:v:535:y:2019:i:c:s0378437119313731. 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/physica-a-statistical-mechpplications/ .

    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.