IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04823354.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Noise and opinion dynamics: How ambiguity promotes pro-majority consensus in the presence of confirmation bias

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Steiglechner

    (Unknown)

  • Marijn Keijzer

    (IAST - Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse)

  • Paul E. Smaldino

    (Unknown)

  • Deyshawn Moser

    (Unknown)

  • Agostino Merico

    (Unknown)

Abstract

Opinion patterns are affected by cognitive biases and noise. While mathematical models have focused extensively on biases, we still know surprisingly little about how different types of noise shape opinion patterns. Here, we use an agent-based opinion dynamics model to investigate the interplay between confirmation bias—represented as bounded confidence—and different types of noise, including a new type: ambiguity noise. While the types of noise considered in the past acted on the agents either before, after, or independent of social interaction, ambiguity noise acts on communicated messages, assuming that the expression of opinions is inherently noisy. We find that noise can induce agreement when the confirmation bias is moderate, but different types of noise lead to quite different conditions for this effect to occur. An application of our model to the climate change debate shows that at just the right mix of confirmation bias and ambiguity noise, opinions tend to converge to a high level of climate change concern. This result is not observed in the absence of noise or with the other types of noise. Our findings highlight the importance of considering and distinguishing between the various types of noise affecting opinion formation and the special role played by ambiguity.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Steiglechner & Marijn Keijzer & Paul E. Smaldino & Deyshawn Moser & Agostino Merico, 2024. "Noise and opinion dynamics: How ambiguity promotes pro-majority consensus in the presence of confirmation bias," Post-Print hal-04823354, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04823354
    DOI: 10.1098/rsos.231071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:hal:journl:hal-04823354. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.