IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v35y2008i6p1028-1054.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sociodynamic Discrete Choice on Networks in Space: Impacts of Agent Heterogeneity on Emergent Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Elenna R Dugundji

    (AMIDSt—Amsterdam Institute for Metropolitan and International Development Studies, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130, 1018 VZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • László Gulyás

    (AITIA Inc. —Artificial Intelligence, Information Technology, Intelligent Agents, Czetz János u. 48-50, 1039 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

The reported research treats interactions between households and generated feedback dynamics in the adoption of various transportation mode alternatives. We consider a model in which an agent's choice is directly influenced by the percentages of the agent's neighbors and socioeconomic peers that make each choice. The model also accounts for shared unobserved attributes of the choice alternatives in the error structure. We address nonglobal interactions explicitly within different social and spatial network structures, combining advanced econometric estimation with computational techniques from multiagent-based simulation, and we present an empirical application of the model using pseudo-panel microdata collected by the Amsterdam Agency for Traffic, Transport and Infrastructure. Additional heterogeneity is introduced in the model through different mechanisms, such as individual-specific sociodemographic characteristics of the agents, individual-specific attributes of the choice alternatives, and the availability of alternatives. We conclude by highlighting limitations of our present study and recommendations for future work.

Suggested Citation

  • Elenna R Dugundji & László Gulyás, 2008. "Sociodynamic Discrete Choice on Networks in Space: Impacts of Agent Heterogeneity on Emergent Outcomes," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 35(6), pages 1028-1054, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:35:y:2008:i:6:p:1028-1054
    DOI: 10.1068/b33021t
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b33021t
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/b33021t?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Andreas Flache & Rainer Hegselmann, 2001. "Do Irregular Grids Make a Difference? Relaxing the Spatial Regularity Assumption in Cellular Models of Social Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 4(4), pages 1-6.
    3. Masanao Aoki, 1995. "Economic Fluctuations With Interactive Agents: Dynamic And Stochastic Externalities," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 148-165, June.
    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. Maness, Michael & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2016. "An indirect latent informational conformity social influence choice model: Formulation and case study," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 75-101.
    2. Lin, Tao & Wang, Donggen & Zhou, Meng, 2018. "Residential relocation and changes in travel behavior: what is the role of social context change?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 360-374.
    3. Smirnov, Oleg A. & Egan, Kevin J., 2012. "Spatial random utility model with an application to recreation demand," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 72-78.
    4. 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.
    5. Maness, Michael & Cirillo, Cinzia & Dugundji, Elenna R., 2015. "Generalized behavioral framework for choice models of social influence: Behavioral and data concerns in travel behavior," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 137-150.
    6. Smirnov, Oleg A., 2010. "Modeling spatial discrete choice," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 292-298, September.
    7. Kowald, Matthias & van den Berg, Pauline & Frei, Andreas & Carrasco, Juan-Antonio & Arentze, Theo & Axhausen, Kay & Mok, Diana & Timmermans, Harry & Wellman, Barry, 2013. "Distance patterns of personal networks in four countries: a comparative study," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 236-248.
    8. Pan, Xiaofeng & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry, 2019. "Modeling social influence using sequential stated adaptation experiments: A study of city trip itinerary choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 652-672.

    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. Zhang, Tianyu & Dong, Peiwu & Zeng, Yongchao & Ju, Yanbing, 2022. "Analyzing the diffusion of competitive smart wearable devices: An agent-based multi-dimensional relative agreement model," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 90-105.
    2. Baetens, J.M. & Van der Weeën, P. & De Baets, B., 2012. "Effect of asynchronous updating on the stability of cellular automata," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 383-394.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    6. 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.
    7. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00623966 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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).
    9. Daron Acemoglu & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2011. "Opinion Dynamics and Learning in Social Networks," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 3-49, March.
    10. Ortigoza, Gerardo M., 2015. "Unstructured triangular cellular automata for modeling geographic spread," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 258(C), pages 520-536.
    11. Choudhary, M. Ali & Michael Orszag, J., 2008. "A cobweb model with local externalities," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 821-847, March.
    12. Song, Xiao & Shi, Wen & Tan, Gary & Ma, Yaofei, 2015. "Multi-level tolerance opinion dynamics in military command and control networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 437(C), pages 322-332.
    13. Song, Xiao & Zhang, Shaoyun & Qian, Lidong, 2013. "Opinion dynamics in networked command and control organizations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(20), pages 5206-5217.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. AskariSichani, Omid & Jalili, Mahdi, 2015. "Influence maximization of informed agents in social networks," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 254(C), pages 229-239.
    17. 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.
    18. Edward L. Glaeser & Jose Scheinkman, 2000. "Non-Market Interactions," NBER Working Papers 8053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Bithell, M. & Macmillan, W.D., 2007. "Escape from the cell: Spatially explicit modelling with and without grids," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 59-78.
    20. Karacuka, Mehmet & Çatık, A. Nazif & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Consumer choice and local network effects in mobile telecommunications in Turkey," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 334-344.
    21. Thomas Feliciani & Andreas Flache & Jochem Tolsma, 2017. "How, when and where can Spatial Segregation Induce Opinion Polarization? Two Competing Models," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(2), pages 1-6.

    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:sae:envirb:v:35:y:2008:i:6:p:1028-1054. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.