IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03359-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Convolution of individual and group identity: self-reliance increases polarisation in basic opinion model

Author

Listed:
  • Lennart Quante

    (Member of the Leibniz Association
    University of Potsdam)

  • Annika Stechemesser

    (Member of the Leibniz Association
    Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC)
    University of Potsdam)

  • Damian Hödtke

    (Member of the Leibniz Association
    Humboldt University of Berlin)

  • Anders Levermann

    (Member of the Leibniz Association
    University of Potsdam)

Abstract

Opinion formation within society follows complex dynamics. Towards its understanding, axiomatic theory can complement data analysis. To this end, we propose an axiomatic model of opinion formation that aims to capture the interaction of individual conviction with social influence in a minimalist fashion. Despite only representing that (1) agents have an initial conviction with respect to a topic and are (2) influenced by their neighbours, the model shows the emergence of opinion clusters from an initially unstructured state. Here, we show that increasing individual self-reliance makes agents more likely to align their socially influenced opinion with their inner conviction which concomitantly leads to increased polarisation. The opinion drift observed with increasing self-reliance may be a plausible analogue of polarisation trends in the real-world. Modelling the basic traits of striving for individual versus group identity, we find a trade-off between individual fulfilment and societal cohesion. This finding from fundamental assumptions can serve as a building block to explain opinion polarisation.

Suggested Citation

  • Lennart Quante & Annika Stechemesser & Damian Hödtke & Anders Levermann, 2024. "Convolution of individual and group identity: self-reliance increases polarisation in basic opinion model," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03359-w
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03359-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03359-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03359-w?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. Peter Fratrič & Giovanni Sileno & Sander Klous & Tom Engers, 2022. "Manipulation of the Bitcoin market: an agent-based study," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-29, December.
    2. Amit Goldenberg & Joseph M. Abruzzo & Zi Huang & Jonas Schöne & David Bailey & Robb Willer & Eran Halperin & James J. Gross, 2023. "Homophily and acrophily as drivers of political segregation," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(2), pages 219-230, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Björn Lindström & Philippe N. Tobler, 2018. "Incidental ostracism emerges from simple learning mechanisms," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(6), pages 405-414, June.
    5. Paul Smaldino & Cynthia Pickett & Jeffrey Sherman & Jeffrey Schank, 2012. "An Agent-Based Model of Social Identity Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(4), pages 1-7.
    6. Frances C. Moore & Katherine Lacasse & Katharine J. Mach & Yoon Ah Shin & Louis J. Gross & Brian Beckage, 2022. "Determinants of emissions pathways in the coupled climate–social system," Nature, Nature, vol. 603(7899), pages 103-111, March.
    7. James N. Druckman & Samara Klar & Yanna Krupnikov & Matthew Levendusky & John Barry Ryan, 2021. "Affective polarization, local contexts and public opinion in America," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 28-38, January.
    8. David Schiefer & Jolanda Noll, 2017. "The Essentials of Social Cohesion: A Literature Review," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 579-603, 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. Buechel, Berno & Hellmann, Tim & Klößner, Stefan, 2015. "Opinion dynamics and wisdom under conformity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 240-257.
    2. Rusinowska, Agnieszka & Taalaibekova, Akylai, 2019. "Opinion formation and targeting when persuaders have extreme and centrist opinions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 9-27.
    3. Shang, Lihui & Zhao, Mingming & Ai, Jun & Su, Zhan, 2021. "Opinion evolution in the Sznajd model on interdependent chains," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 565(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Andreas Koulouris & Ioannis Katerelos & Theodore Tsekeris, 2013. "Multi-Equilibria Regulation Agent-Based Model of Opinion Dynamics in Social Networks," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 11(1), pages 51-70.
    6. Lucia Freira & Marco Sartorio & Cynthia Boruchowicz & Florencia Lopez Boo & Joaquin Navajas, 2021. "The interplay between partisanship, forecasted COVID-19 deaths, and support for preventive policies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Salman, Muhammad & Long, Xingle & Wang, Guimei & Zha, Donglan, 2022. "Paris climate agreement and global environmental efficiency: New evidence from fuzzy regression discontinuity design," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    8. Thomas Moore & Patrick Finley & Nancy Brodsky & Theresa Brown & Benjamin Apelberg & Bridget Ambrose & Robert Glass, 2015. "Modeling Education and Advertising with Opinion Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(2), pages 1-7.
    9. 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.
    10. Russell Golman & Aditi Jain & Sonica Saraf, 2019. "Hipsters and the Cool: A Game Theoretic Analysis of Social Identity, Trends and Fads," Papers 1910.13385, arXiv.org.
    11. Huang, Changwei & Hou, Yongzhao & Han, Wenchen, 2023. "Coevolution of consensus and cooperation in evolutionary Hegselmann–Krause dilemma with the cooperation cost," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Ploy Achakulwisut & Peter Erickson & Céline Guivarch & Roberto Schaeffer & Elina Brutschin & Steve Pye, 2023. "Global fossil fuel reduction pathways under different climate mitigation strategies and ambitions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2023. "On the Design of Public Debate in Social Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 71(2), pages 626-648, March.
    15. Kułakowski, Krzysztof, 2009. "Opinion polarization in the Receipt–Accept–Sample model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 388(4), pages 469-476.
    16. James N. Druckman, 2022. "Threats to Science: Politicization, Misinformation, and Inequalities," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 8-24, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Vicky Chuqiao Yang & Tamara van der Does & Henrik Olsson, 2021. "Falling through the cracks: Modeling the formation of social category boundaries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-11, March.
    19. Schweitzer, Frank, 2021. "Social percolation revisited: From 2d lattices to adaptive networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(C).
    20. Toth, Gabor & Galam, Serge, 2022. "Deviations from the majority: A local flip model," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 159(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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03359-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.