IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0139572.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Undecided Have the Key: Interaction-Driven Opinion Dynamics in a Three State Model

Author

Listed:
  • Pablo Balenzuela
  • Juan Pablo Pinasco
  • Viktoriya Semeshenko

Abstract

The effects of interpersonal interactions on individual’s agreements result in a social aggregation process which is reflected in the formation of collective states, as for instance, groups of individuals with a similar opinion about a given issue. This field, which has been a longstanding concern of sociologists and psychologists, has been extended into an area of experimental social psychology, and even has attracted the attention of physicists and mathematicians. In this article, we present a novel model of opinion formation in which agents may either have a strict preference for a choice, or be undecided. The opinion shift emerges, in a threshold process, as a consequence of a cumulative persuasion for either one of the two opinions in repeated interactions. There are two main ingredients which play key roles in determining the steady states: the initial fraction of undecided agents and the change in agents’ persuasion after each interaction. As a function of these two parameters, the model presents a wide range of solutions, among which there are consensus of each opinion and bi-polarization. We found that a minimum fraction of undecided agents is not crucial for reaching consensus only, but also to determine a dominant opinion in a polarized situation. In order to gain a deeper comprehension of the dynamics, we also present the theoretical framework of the model. The master equations are of special interest for their nontrivial properties and difficulties in being solved analytically.

Suggested Citation

  • Pablo Balenzuela & Juan Pablo Pinasco & Viktoriya Semeshenko, 2015. "The Undecided Have the Key: Interaction-Driven Opinion Dynamics in a Three State Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0139572
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139572
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0139572
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0139572&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0139572?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    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. Gimenez, M. Cecilia & Paz García, Ana Pamela & Burgos Paci, Maxi A. & Reinaudi, Luis, 2016. "Range of interaction in an opinion evolution model of ideological self-positioning: Contagion, hesitance and polarization," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 447(C), pages 320-330.
    2. Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Semeshenko, Viktoriya & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2017. "Modeling opinion dynamics: Theoretical analysis and continuous approximation," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 210-215.
    3. Qesmi, Redouane, 2021. "Hopf bifurcation in an opinion model with state-dependent delay," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 153(P2).
    4. 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.
    5. Alvarez, Emiliano & Brida, Juan Gabriel, 2019. "What about the others? Consensus and equilibria in the presence of self-interest and conformity in social groups," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 518(C), pages 285-298.
    6. Lucila G Alvarez-Zuzek & Cristian E La Rocca & Federico Vazquez & Lidia A Braunstein, 2016. "Interacting Social Processes on Interconnected Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    7. 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).
    8. Qesmi, Redouane, 2021. "Dynamics of an opinion model with threshold-type delay," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    9. Pedraza, Lucía & Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Semeshenko, Viktoriya & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2023. "Mesoscopic analytical approach in a three state opinion model with continuous internal variable," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 168(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. Chang, Eric C. & Cheng, Joseph W. & Khorana, Ajay, 2000. "An examination of herd behavior in equity markets: An international perspective," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(10), pages 1651-1679, October.
    2. Gu, Chen & Guo, Xu & Zhang, Chengping, 2022. "Analyst target price revisions and institutional herding," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Ferdinand Thies & Sören Wallbach & Michael Wessel & Markus Besler & Alexander Benlian, 2022. "Initial coin offerings and the cryptocurrency hype - the moderating role of exogenous and endogenous signals," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1691-1705, September.
    4. Ruomeng Cui & Dennis J. Zhang & Achal Bassamboo, 2019. "Learning from Inventory Availability Information: Evidence from Field Experiments on Amazon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1216-1235, March.
    5. Stéphan Marette, 2017. "Jill E. Hobbs, Stavroula Malla, Eric K. Sogah and May T. Yeung, 2014, Regulating Health Foods. Policy Challenges and Consumer Conundrums," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 93-94, July.
    6. Hedlund, Jonas & Oyarzun, Carlos, 2016. "Imitation in Heterogeneous Populations," Working Papers 0625, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    7. Cao, Melanie & Shi, Shouyong, 2006. "Signaling in the Internet craze of initial public offerings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 818-833, September.
    8. Martin Andersson & Johan P. Larsson, 2022. "Historical local industry structure, voting patterns and the long-run entrepreneurial character of regions: Swedish examples," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 611-631, December.
    9. Wei He & Qian Wang, 2020. "The peer effect of corporate financial decisions around split share structure reform in China," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 474-493, July.
    10. Ben Klemens, 2013. "A Peer-based Model of Fat-tailed Outcomes," Papers 1304.0718, arXiv.org.
    11. Kraemer, Carlo & Noth, Markus & Weber, Martin, 2006. "Information aggregation with costly information and random ordering: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 423-432, March.
    12. Youn Kue Na & Sungmin Kang, 2018. "Sustainable Diffusion of Fashion Information on Mobile Friends-Based Social Network Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, May.
    13. Ye Zhang, 2020. "Discrimination in the Venture Capital Industry: Evidence from Field Experiments," Papers 2010.16084, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    14. Fishman, Arthur & Fishman, Ram & Gneezy, Uri, 2019. "A tale of two food stands: Observational learning in the field," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 101-108.
    15. Frey, Rainer & Hussinger, Katrin, 2006. "The role of technology in M&As: a firm-level comparison of cross-border and domestic deals," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2006,45, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    16. Marco Cipriani & Antonio Guarino, 2009. "Herd Behavior in Financial Markets: An Experiment with Financial Market Professionals," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(1), pages 206-233, March.
    17. Jacob K. Goeree & Leeat Yariv, 2015. "Conformity in the lab," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 15-28, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Boğaçhan Çelen & Kyle Hyndman, 2012. "An experiment of social learning with endogenous timing," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(2), pages 251-268, September.
    20. Bohl, Martin T. & Branger, Nicole & Trede, Mark, 2017. "The case for herding is stronger than you think," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 30-40.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0139572. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.