IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v13y2021i11p296-d684658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community Formation as a Byproduct of a Recommendation System: A Simulation Model for Bubble Formation in Social Media

Author

Listed:
  • Franco Bagnoli

    (Department of Physics and Astronomy and CSDC, University of Florence, Via G. Sansone 1, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy
    INFN, sect. Florence, Via G. Sansone 1, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy)

  • Guido de Bonfioli Cavalcabo’

    (Department of Physics and Astronomy and CSDC, University of Florence, Via G. Sansone 1, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy)

  • Banedetto Casu

    (Department of Physics and Astronomy and CSDC, University of Florence, Via G. Sansone 1, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy)

  • Andrea Guazzini

    (Department of Education, Languages, Intercultures, Literatures and Psychology and CSDC, University of Florence, Via Laura 48, 50121 Firenze, Italy)

Abstract

We investigate the problem of the formation of communities of users that selectively exchange messages among them in a simulated environment. This closed community can be seen as the prototype of the bubble effect, i.e., the isolation of individuals from other communities. We develop a computational model of a society, where each individual is represented as a simple neural network (a perceptron), under the influence of a recommendation system that honestly forward messages (posts) to other individuals that in the past appreciated previous messages from the sender, i.e., that showed a certain degree of affinity. This dynamical affinity database determines the interaction network. We start from a set of individuals with random preferences (factors), so that at the beginning, there is no community structure at all. We show that the simple effect of the recommendation system is not sufficient to induce the isolation of communities, even when the database of user–user affinity is based on a small sample of initial messages, subject to small-sampling fluctuations. On the contrary, when the simulated individuals evolve their internal factors accordingly with the received messages, communities can emerge. This emergence is stronger the slower the evolution of individuals, while immediate convergence favors to the breakdown of the system in smaller communities. In any case, the final communities are strongly dependent on the sequence of messages, since one can get different final communities starting from the same initial distribution of users’ factors, changing only the order of users emitting messages. In other words, the main outcome of our investigation is that the bubble formation depends on users’ evolution and is strongly dependent on early interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Franco Bagnoli & Guido de Bonfioli Cavalcabo’ & Banedetto Casu & Andrea Guazzini, 2021. "Community Formation as a Byproduct of a Recommendation System: A Simulation Model for Bubble Formation in Social Media," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-11, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:296-:d:684658
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/13/11/296/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/13/11/296/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maia, H.P. & Ferreira, S.C. & Martins, M.L., 2021. "Adaptive network approach for emergence of societal bubbles," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 572(C).
    2. Ron Berman & Zsolt Katona, 2020. "Curation Algorithms and Filter Bubbles in Social Networks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 296-316, March.
    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. Blattner, Marcel & Zhang, Yi-Cheng & Maslov, Sergei, 2007. "Exploring an opinion network for taste prediction: An empirical study," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 373(C), pages 753-758.
    5. Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron & Józef Sznajd, 2000. "Opinion Evolution In Closed Community," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(06), pages 1157-1165.
    6. Bagnoli, Franco & Berrones, Arturo & Franci, Fabio, 2004. "De gustibus disputandum (forecasting opinions by knowledge networks)," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 332(C), pages 509-518.
    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. Svetlana S. Bodrunova, 2022. "Editorial for the Special Issue “Selected Papers from the 9th Annual Conference ‘Comparative Media Studies in Today’s World’ (CMSTW’2021)”," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-3, November.

    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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Toth, Gabor & Galam, Serge, 2022. "Deviations from the majority: A local flip model," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Diao, Su-Meng & Liu, Yun & Zeng, Qing-An & Luo, Gui-Xun & Xiong, Fei, 2014. "A novel opinion dynamics model based on expanded observation ranges and individuals’ social influences in social networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 415(C), pages 220-228.
    6. 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).
    7. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2016. "Opinion evolution influenced by informed agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 431-441.
    8. Si, Xia-Meng & Wang, Wen-Dong & Ma, Yan, 2016. "Role of propagation thresholds in sentiment-based model of opinion evolution with information diffusion," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 451(C), pages 549-559.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Karataieva, Tatiana & Koshmanenko, Volodymyr & Krawczyk, Małgorzata J. & Kułakowski, Krzysztof, 2019. "Mean field model of a game for power," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 525(C), pages 535-547.
    12. AskariSichani, Omid & Jalili, Mahdi, 2015. "Influence maximization of informed agents in social networks," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 254(C), pages 229-239.
    13. Agnieszka Kowalska-Styczeń & Krzysztof Malarz, 2020. "Noise induced unanimity and disorder in opinion formation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, July.
    14. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    15. Wang, Chaoqian, 2021. "Opinion dynamics with bilateral propaganda and unilateral information blockade," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 566(C).
    16. Kurmyshev, Evguenii & Juárez, Héctor A. & González-Silva, Ricardo A., 2011. "Dynamics of bounded confidence opinion in heterogeneous social networks: Concord against partial antagonism," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(16), pages 2945-2955.
    17. Song, Xiao & Shi, Wen & Ma, Yaofei & Yang, Chen, 2015. "Impact of informal networks on opinion dynamics in hierarchically formal organization," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 436(C), pages 916-924.
    18. C.R. Martins, André, 2014. "Discrete opinion models as a limit case of the CODA model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 395(C), pages 352-357.
    19. Si, Xia-Meng & Liu, Yun & Xiong, Fei & Zhang, Yan-Chao & Ding, Fei & Cheng, Hui, 2010. "Effects of selective attention on continuous opinions and discrete decisions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(18), pages 3711-3719.
    20. Muslim, Roni & Wella, Sasfan A. & Nugraha, Ahmad R.T., 2022. "Phase transition in the majority rule model with the nonconformist agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 608(P2).

    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:gam:jftint:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:296-:d:684658. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.