IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jbecon/v91y2021i9d10.1007_s11573-021-01064-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Cabrera

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Björn Ross

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Daniel Röchert

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Felix Brünker

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

  • Stefan Stieglitz

    (University of Duisburg-Essen)

Abstract

Social media has become important in shaping the public discourse on controversial topics. Many businesses therefore monitor different social media channels and try to react adequately to a potentially harmful opinion climate. Still, little is known about how opinions form in an increasingly connected world. The spiral of silence theory provides a way of explaining deviations between the perceived opinion climate and true beliefs of the public. However, the emergence of a spiral of silence on social media is hard to observe because only the thoughts of those who express their opinions are evident there. Recent research has therefore focused on modelling the processes behind the spiral of silence. A particular characteristic of social media networks is the presence of communities. Members of a community tend to be connected more with other members of the same community than with outsiders. Naturally, this might affect the development of public opinion. In the present article we investigate how the number of communities in a network and connectivity between them affects the perceived opinion climate. We find that higher connectivity between communities makes it more likely for a global spiral of silence to appear. Moreover, a network fragmented into more, smaller communities seems to provide more “safe spaces” for a minority opinion to prevail.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Cabrera & Björn Ross & Daniel Röchert & Felix Brünker & Stefan Stieglitz, 2021. "The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1331-1355, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jbecon:v:91:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11573-021-01064-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11573-021-01064-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11573-021-01064-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11573-021-01064-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guus ten Broeke & George van Voorn & Arend Ligtenberg, 2016. "Which Sensitivity Analysis Method Should I Use for My Agent-Based Model?," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(1), pages 1-5.
    2. Kahn, Matthew E., 2007. "Do greens drive Hummers or hybrids? Environmental ideology as a determinant of consumer choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 129-145, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Yue Wu & Ya-Jun Du & Xian-Yong Li & Xiao-Liang Chen, 2015. "Exploring the spiral of silence in adjustable social networks," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 26(11), pages 1-12.
    5. 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.
    6. Stern, Samuel & Livan, Giacomo, 2021. "The impact of noise and topology on opinion dynamics in social networks," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113424, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Hopkins, Debbie, 2016. "Can environmental awareness explain declining preference for car-based mobility amongst generation Y? A qualitative examination of learn to drive behaviours," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 149-163.
    8. 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.
    9. Jan Lorenz, 2006. "Consensus Strikes Back in the Hegselmann-Krause Model of Continuous Opinion Dynamics Under Bounded Confidence," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8.
    10. Guillaume Deffuant & David Neau & Frederic Amblard & Gérard Weisbuch, 2000. "Mixing beliefs among interacting agents," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01n04), pages 87-98.
    11. Giorgio Fagiolo & Alessio Moneta & Paul Windrum, 2007. "A Critical Guide to Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models in Economics: Methodologies, Procedures, and Open Problems," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 195-226, October.
    12. Michał Czepkiewicz & Áróra Árnadóttir & Jukka Heinonen, 2019. "Flights Dominate Travel Emissions of Young Urbanites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-35, November.
    13. Duncan J. Watts & Peter Sheridan Dodds, 2007. "Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 441-458, May.
    14. Siyuan Ma & Hongzhong Zhang & Hongshu Chen, 2021. "Opinion Expression Dynamics in Social Media Chat Groups: An Integrated Quasi-Experimental and Agent-Based Model Approach," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-14, January.
    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. Kai Fischbach & Johannes Marx & Tim Weitzel, 2021. "Agent-based modeling in social sciences," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1263-1270, 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. Shane T. Mueller & Yin-Yin Sarah Tan, 2018. "Cognitive perspectives on opinion dynamics: the role of knowledge in consensus formation, opinion divergence, and group polarization," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 15-48, January.
    2. Catherine A. Glass & David H. Glass, 2021. "Social Influence of Competing Groups and Leaders in Opinion Dynamics," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 58(3), pages 799-823, October.
    3. Maciel, Marcelo V. & Martins, André C.R., 2020. "Ideologically motivated biases in a multiple issues opinion model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 553(C).
    4. Martins, André C.R., 2022. "Extremism definitions in opinion dynamics models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).
    5. 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).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Toth, Gabor & Galam, Serge, 2022. "Deviations from the majority: A local flip model," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    9. 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).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Azzimonti, Marina & Fernandes, Marcos, 2023. "Social media networks, fake news, and polarization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    13. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    14. Wang, Chaoqian, 2021. "Opinion dynamics with bilateral propaganda and unilateral information blockade," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 566(C).
    15. 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).
    16. Quanbo Zha & Gang Kou & Hengjie Zhang & Haiming Liang & Xia Chen & Cong-Cong Li & Yucheng Dong, 2020. "Opinion dynamics in finance and business: a literature review and research opportunities," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, December.
    17. Castro, Luis E. & Shaikh, Nazrul I., 2018. "A particle-learning-based approach to estimate the influence matrix of online social networks," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-18.
    18. Bartłomiej Nowak & Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron, 2019. "Homogeneous Symmetrical Threshold Model with Nonconformity: Independence versus Anticonformity," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-14, April.
    19. 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.
    20. Muhammad Umar B. Niazi & A. Bülent Özgüler, 2021. "A Differential Game Model of Opinion Dynamics: Accord and Discord as Nash Equilibria," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 137-160, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agent-based model; Spiral of silence; Network; Communities; Stochastic block model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation

    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:spr:jbecon:v:91:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11573-021-01064-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.