IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2020-173-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Noisy Opinion Formation Model with Two Opposing Mass Media

Author

Abstract

Processes of individual attitude formation and their macroscopic consequences have become an intriguing research topic, and agent-based models of opinion formation have been proposed to understand this phenomenon. This study conducted an agent-based simulation and examined the role of mass media in a noisy opinion formation process, where opinion heterogeneity is preserved by a weak intensity of assimilation and errors accompanying opinion modifications. In a computational model, agents conformed to their neighbours' opinions in social networks. In addition, each agent tended to be influenced by one of a two external agents with fixed opinions, that is, mass media that take opposite positions on an opinion spectrum. The simulation results demonstrated that a small probability of interactions with mass media reduces opinion heterogeneity even with extreme mass media position values. However, a large frequency of interactions with mass media increases opinion heterogeneity. Accordingly, intermediate assimilation strength achieves the least heterogeneous opinion distribution. The influence of mass media dampens the effects of network topology. Our simulation implies that mass media can play qualitatively different roles depending on their positions and intensity of influence.

Suggested Citation

  • Hirofumi Takesue, 2021. "A Noisy Opinion Formation Model with Two Opposing Mass Media," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 24(4), pages 1-3.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2020-173-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/24/4/3/3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher A. Bail & Lisa P. Argyle & Taylor W. Brown & John P. Bumpus & Haohan Chen & M. B. Fallin Hunzaker & Jaemin Lee & Marcus Mann & Friedolin Merhout & Alexander Volfovsky, 2018. "Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(37), pages 9216-9221, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Andreas Flache & Michael Mäs & Thomas Feliciani & Edmund Chattoe-Brown & Guillaume Deffuant & Sylvie Huet & Jan Lorenz, 2017. "Models of Social Influence: Towards the Next Frontiers," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(4), pages 1-2.
    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. Takesue, Hirofumi, 2023. "Relative opinion similarity leads to the emergence of large clusters in opinion formation models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 622(C).

    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. Cui, Peng-Bi, 2023. "Exploring the foundation of social diversity and coherence with a novel attraction–repulsion model framework," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 618(C).
    2. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    4. Matthew I. Jones & Antonio D. Sirianni & Feng Fu, 2022. "Polarization, abstention, and the median voter theorem," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Takesue, Hirofumi, 2023. "Relative opinion similarity leads to the emergence of large clusters in opinion formation models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 622(C).
    6. Botte, Nina & Ryckebusch, Jan & Rocha, Luis E.C., 2022. "Clustering and stubbornness regulate the formation of echo chambers in personalised opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 599(C).
    7. Faia, Ester & Fuster, Andreas & Pezone, Vincenzo & Zafar, Basit, 2021. "Biases in information selection and processing: Survey evidence from the pandemic," SAFE Working Paper Series 307, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    8. Crokidakis, Nuno & Sigaud, Lucas, 2021. "Modeling the evolution of drinking behavior: A Statistical Physics perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Zhao, Laijun & Qiu, Xiaoyan & Wang, Xiaoli & Wang, Jiajia, 2013. "Rumor spreading model considering forgetting and remembering mechanisms in inhomogeneous networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(4), pages 987-994.
    11. 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.
    12. Serge Galam, 2016. "The invisible hand and the rational agent are behind bubbles and crashes," Papers 1601.02990, arXiv.org.
    13. Dickinson, David L., 2020. "Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias: An Examination of Politics and Religion," IZA Discussion Papers 13241, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Denis Tverskoi & Andrea Guido & Giulia Andrighetto & Angel Sánchez & Sergey Gavrilets, 2023. "Disentangling material, social, and cognitive determinants of human behavior and beliefs," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    15. Guillaume Deffuant & Ilaria Bertazzi & Sylvie Huet, 2018. "The Dark Side Of Gossips: Hints From A Simple Opinion Dynamics Model," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Schweitzer, Frank, 2021. "Social percolation revisited: From 2d lattices to adaptive networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 570(C).
    17. 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.
    18. 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).
    19. 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).
    20. Iandoli, Luca & Primario, Simonetta & Zollo, Giuseppe, 2021. "The impact of group polarization on the quality of online debate in social media: A systematic literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(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:jas:jasssj:2020-173-3. 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: Francesco Renzini (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.