IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/acsxxx/v22y2019i04ns0219525919500085.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two-Opinions-Dynamics Generated By Inflexibles And Non-Contrarian And Contrarian Floaters

Author

Listed:
  • F. JACOBS

    (Institute of Biology, Leiden University Sylviusweg 72, NL-2333 BE Leiden, The Netherlands)

  • S. GALAM

    (CEVIPOF - Centre for Political Research, Sciences Po and CNRS, 98, rue de l’Université 75007 Paris, France)

Abstract

We assume a community whose members adopt one of two opinions A or B. Each member appears as an inflexible, or as a non-contrarian or contrarian floater. An inflexible sticks to its opinion, whereas a floater may change into a floater of the alternative opinion. The occurrence of this change is governed by the local majority rule: members meet in groups of a fixed size, and a floater then changes its opinion provided it is a minority in the group. Subsequently, a non-contrarian floater keeps the opinion as adopted under the local majority rule, whereas a contrarian floater adopts the alternative opinion. Whereas the effects of on the one hand inflexibles and on the other hand non-contrarians and contrarians have previously been studied separately, the current approach allows us to gain insight in the effect of their combined presence in a community. Given fixed proportions of inflexibles (αA,αB) for the two opinions, and fixed fractions of contrarians (γA,γB) among the A and B floaters, we derive the update equation pt+1 for the overall support for opinion A at time t+1, given pt. The update equation is derived respectively for local group sizes 1, 2 and 3. The associated dynamics generated by repeated local updates is then determined to identify its asymptotic steady configuration. The full opinion flow diagram is thus obtained, showing conditions in terms of the parameters for each opinion to eventually win the competing dynamics. Various dynamical scenarios are thus exhibited, and it is derived that relatively small densities of inflexibles allow for more variation in the qualitative outcome of the dynamics than higher densities of inflexibles.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:acsxxx:v:22:y:2019:i:04:n:s0219525919500085
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219525919500085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219525919500085
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219525919500085?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. Galam, Serge, 2010. "Public debates driven by incomplete scientific data: The cases of evolution theory, global warming and H1N1 pandemic influenza," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(17), pages 3619-3631.
    2. Galam, Serge, 2004. "The dynamics of minority opinions in democratic debate," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 336(1), pages 56-62.
    3. Sebastian Goncalves & M. F. Laguna & J. R. Iglesias, 2012. "Why, when, and how fast innovations are adopted," Papers 1208.2589, arXiv.org.
    4. Galam, Serge & Jacobs, Frans, 2007. "The role of inflexible minorities in the breaking of democratic opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 381(C), pages 366-376.
    5. Nicolas Perony & René Pfitzner & Ingo Scholtes & Claudio J. Tessone & Frank Schweitzer, 2013. "Enhancing Consensus Under Opinion Bias By Means Of Hierarchical Decision Making," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1-15.
    6. Pires, Marcelo A. & Crokidakis, Nuno, 2017. "Dynamics of epidemic spreading with vaccination: Impact of social pressure and engagement," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 467(C), pages 167-179.
    7. Johannes J. Schneider, 2004. "The Influence Of Contrarians And Opportunists On The Stability Of A Democracy In The Sznajd Model," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 659-674.
    8. Gérard Weisbuch, 2015. "From Anti-Conformism to Extremism," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(3), pages 1-1.
    9. Lee, Eun & Holme, Petter & Lee, Sang Hoon, 2017. "Modeling the dynamics of dissent," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 486(C), pages 262-272.
    10. G'erard Weisbuch, 2015. "From anti-conformism to extremism," Papers 1503.04799, arXiv.org.
    11. Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron & Janusz Szwabiński & Rafał Weron, 2014. "Is the Person-Situation Debate Important for Agent-Based Modeling and Vice-Versa?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-7, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Wio, Horacio S. & de la Lama, Marta S. & López, Juan M., 2006. "Contrarian-like behavior and system size stochastic resonance in an opinion spreading model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 371(1), pages 108-111.
    14. Gambaro, Joao Paulo & Crokidakis, Nuno, 2017. "The influence of contrarians in the dynamics of opinion formation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 486(C), pages 465-472.
    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. 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.
    2. Weron, Tomasz & Kowalska-Pyzalska, Anna & Weron, Rafał, 2018. "The role of educational trainings in the diffusion of smart metering platforms: An agent-based modeling approach," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 505(C), pages 591-600.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Toth, Gabor & Galam, Serge, 2022. "Deviations from the majority: A local flip model," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    8. Cheng, Chun & Luo, Yun & Yu, Changbin, 2020. "Dynamic mechanism of social bots interfering with public opinion in network," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 551(C).
    9. Nizamani, Sarwat & Memon, Nasrullah & Galam, Serge, 2014. "From public outrage to the burst of public violence: An epidemic-like model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 416(C), pages 620-630.
    10. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    11. Jędrzejewski, Arkadiusz & Sznajd-Weron, Katarzyna, 2018. "Impact of memory on opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 505(C), pages 306-315.
    12. 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.
    13. Patryk Siedlecki & Janusz Szwabiński & Tomasz Weron, 2016. "The Interplay Between Conformity and Anticonformity and its Polarizing Effect on Society," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(4), pages 1-9.
    14. 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.
    15. Czaplicka, Agnieszka & Charalambous, Christos & Toral, Raul & San Miguel, Maxi, 2022. "Biased-voter model: How persuasive a small group can be?," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Balankin, Alexander S. & Martínez Cruz, Miguel Ángel & Martínez, Alfredo Trejo, 2011. "Effect of initial concentration and spatial heterogeneity of active agent distribution on opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(21), pages 3876-3887.
    18. 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).
    19. Serge Galam, 2011. "Market efficiency, anticipation and the formation of bubbles-crashes," Papers 1106.1577, arXiv.org.
    20. Galam, Serge, 2021. "Will Trump win again in the 2020 election? An answer from a sociophysics model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(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:wsi:acsxxx:v:22:y:2019:i:04:n:s0219525919500085. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/acs/acs.shtml .

    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.