IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mse/cesdoc/22001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the design of public debate in social networks

Author

Abstract

We propose a model of the joint evolution of opinions and social relationships in a setting where social influence decays over time. The dynamics are based on bounded confidence: social connections between individuals with distant opinions are severed while new connections are formed between individuals with similar opinions. Our model naturally gives raise to strong diversity, i.e., the persistence of heterogeneous opinions in connected societies, a phenomenon that most existing models fail to capture. the intensity of social interactions is the key parameter that governs the dynamics. First, it determines the asymptotic distributionn of opinions. In particular, increasing the intensity of social interactions brings society closer to consensus. Second, it determines the risk of polariztion, which is shown to increase with the intensity of social interactions. Our results allow to frame the problem of the design of public debates in a formal setting. We hence characterize the optimal strategy for a social planner who controls the intensity of the public debate and thus faces a trade-off between the pursuit of social consensus and the risk of polarization. We also consider applications to political campaigning and show that both minority and majority candidates can have incentives to lead society towards polarization

Suggested Citation

  • Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2022. "On the design of public debate in social networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22001, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  • Handle: RePEc:mse:cesdoc:22001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://mse.univ-paris1.fr/pub/mse/CES2022/22001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03531788
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. , & , & ,, 2014. "Dynamics of information exchange in endogenous social networks," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), January.
    2. Yann Bramoullé & Andrea Galeotti & Brian Rogers, 2016. "The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Networks," Post-Print hal-03572533, HAL.
    3. Peter M. DeMarzo & Dimitri Vayanos & Jeffrey Zwiebel, 2003. "Persuasion Bias, Social Influence, and Unidimensional Opinions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 909-968.
    4. 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.
    5. Acemoglu, Daron & Ozdaglar, Asuman & ParandehGheibi, Ali, 2010. "Spread of (mis)information in social networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 194-227, November.
    6. Daron Acemoğlu & Giacomo Como & Fabio Fagnani & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2013. "Opinion Fluctuations and Disagreement in Social Networks," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 1-27, February.
    7. Guodong Shi & Alexandre Proutiere & Mikael Johansson & John S. Baras & Karl H. Johansson, 2016. "The Evolution of Beliefs over Signed Social Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 585-604, 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. 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.
    2. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2022. "On the design of public debate in social networks," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03770884, HAL.
    3. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2022. "On the design of public debate in social networks," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-03770884, HAL.
    4. Foerster, Manuel, 2018. "Finite languages, persuasion bias, and opinion fluctuations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 46-57.
    5. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2022. "On the design of public debate in social networks," Post-Print hal-03770884, HAL.
    6. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Emily Tanimura, 2015. "Strategic influence in social networks," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01158168, HAL.
    7. Eger, Steffen, 2016. "Opinion dynamics and wisdom under out-group discrimination," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 97-107.
    8. Fernandes, Marcos R., 2023. "Confirmation bias in social networks," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 59-76.
    9. Azzimonti, Marina & Fernandes, Marcos, 2023. "Social media networks, fake news, and polarization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Matjaž Steinbacher & Mitja Steinbacher, 2019. "Opinion Formation with Imperfect Agents as an Evolutionary Process," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 53(2), pages 479-505, February.
    11. Hai-Bo Hu & Cang-Hai Li & Qing-Ying Miao, 2017. "Opinion Diffusion On Multilayer Social Networks," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(06n07), pages 1-25, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Prummer, Anja & Siedlarek, Jan-Peter, 2017. "Community leaders and the preservation of cultural traits," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 143-176.
    14. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    15. Arifovic, Jasmina & Eaton, B. Curtis & Walker, Graeme, 2015. "The coevolution of beliefs and networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 46-63.
    16. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    17. Battiston, Pietro & Stanca, Luca, 2015. "Boundedly rational opinion dynamics in social networks: Does indegree matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 400-421.
    18. Berno Buechel & Stefan Klößner & Martin Lochmüller & Heiko Rauhut, 2020. "The strength of weak leaders: an experiment on social influence and social learning in teams," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 259-293, June.
    19. Patrick Mellacher, 2021. "Opinion Dynamics with Conflicting Interests," Papers 2111.09408, arXiv.org.
    20. Shyam Gouri Suresh & Scott Jeffrey, 2017. "The Consequences of Social Pressures on Partisan Opinion Dynamics," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(2), pages 242-259, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    opinion dynamics; network formation; network fragility; polarization; institution design; political campaign;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • C65 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Miscellaneous Mathematical Tools
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mse:cesdoc:22001. 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: Lucie Label (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cenp1fr.html .

    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.