IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2202.12453.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Social Learning under Platform Influence: Consensus and Persistent Disagreement

Author

Listed:
  • Ozan Candogan
  • Nicole Immorlica
  • Bar Light
  • Jerry Anunrojwong

Abstract

Individuals increasingly rely on social networking platforms to form opinions. However, these platforms typically aim to maximize engagement, which may not align with social good. In this paper, we introduce an opinion dynamics model where agents are connected in a social network, and update their opinions based on their neighbors' opinions and on the content shown to them by the platform. We focus on a stochastic block model with two blocks, where the initial opinions of the individuals in different blocks are different. We prove that for large and dense enough networks the trajectory of opinion dynamics in such networks can be approximated well by a simple two-agent system. The latter admits tractable analytical analysis, which we leverage to provide interesting insights into the platform's impact on the social learning outcome in our original two-block model. Specifically, by using our approximation result, we show that agents' opinions approximately converge to some limiting opinion, which is either: consensus, where all agents agree, or persistent disagreement, where agents' opinions differ. We find that when the platform is weak and there is a high number of connections between agents with different initial opinions, a consensus equilibrium is likely. In this case, even if a persistent disagreement equilibrium arises, the polarization in this equilibrium, i.e., the degree of disagreement, is low. When the platform is strong, a persistent disagreement equilibrium is likely and the equilibrium polarization is high. A moderate platform typically leads to a persistent disagreement equilibrium with moderate polarization. We analyze the effect of initial polarization on consensus and explore numerically various extensions including a three block stochastic model and a correlation between initial opinions and agents' connection probabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ozan Candogan & Nicole Immorlica & Bar Light & Jerry Anunrojwong, 2022. "Social Learning under Platform Influence: Consensus and Persistent Disagreement," Papers 2202.12453, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2202.12453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.12453
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg, 1995. "Word-of-Mouth Communication and Social Learning," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(1), pages 93-125.
    2. Francis Bloch & Gabrielle Demange & Rachel Kranton, 2018. "Rumors And Social Networks," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(2), pages 421-448, May.
    3. Ellison, Glenn & Fudenberg, Drew, 1993. "Rules of Thumb for Social Learning," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 612-643, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Halberstam, Yosh & Knight, Brian, 2016. "Homophily, group size, and the diffusion of political information in social networks: Evidence from Twitter," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 73-88.
    6. Hunt Allcott & Luca Braghieri & Sarah Eichmeyer & Matthew Gentzkow, 2020. "The Welfare Effects of Social Media," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(3), pages 629-676, March.
    7. Ro'ee Levy, 2021. "Social Media, News Consumption, and Polarization: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 831-870, March.
    8. Yphtach Lelkes & Gaurav Sood & Shanto Iyengar, 2017. "The Hostile Audience: The Effect of Access to Broadband Internet on Partisan Affect," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 5-20, January.
    9. Daron Acemoglu & Munther A. Dahleh & Ilan Lobel & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2011. "Bayesian Learning in Social Networks," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(4), pages 1201-1236.
    10. Jadbabaie, Ali & Molavi, Pooya & Sandroni, Alvaro & Tahbaz-Salehi, Alireza, 2012. "Non-Bayesian social learning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 210-225.
    11. Matthew C Benigni & Kenneth Joseph & Kathleen M Carley, 2017. "Online extremism and the communities that sustain it: Detecting the ISIS supporting community on Twitter," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, December.
    12. Azzimonti, Marina & Fernandes, Marcos, 2023. "Social media networks, fake news, and polarization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    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. Azzimonti, Marina & Fernandes, Marcos, 2023. "Social media networks, fake news, and polarization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    4. Saeed Badri & Bernd Heidergott & Ines Lindner, 2022. "Na?ve Learning in Social Networks with Fake News: Bots as a Singularity," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-097/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. , & ,, 2015. "Information diffusion in networks through social learning," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), September.
    6. Li, Wei & Tan, Xu, 2021. "Cognitively-constrained learning from neighbors," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 32-54.
    7. Davide Crapis & Bar Ifrach & Costis Maglaras & Marco Scarsini, 2017. "Monopoly Pricing in the Presence of Social Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3586-3608, November.
    8. Germano, Fabrizio & Sobbrio, Francesco, 2020. "Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    9. Jadbabaie, Ali & Molavi, Pooya & Sandroni, Alvaro & Tahbaz-Salehi, Alireza, 2012. "Non-Bayesian social learning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 210-225.
    10. Dasaratha, Krishna & He, Kevin, 2020. "Network structure and naive sequential learning," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(2), May.
    11. 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.
    12. Larson, Nathan, 2015. "Inertia in social learning from a summary statistic," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 596-626.
    13. Abhijit Banerjee & Olivier Compte, 2022. "Consensus and Disagreement: Information Aggregation under (not so) Naive Learning," NBER Working Papers 29897, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Jakob Grazzini & Domenico Massaro, 2021. "Dispersed information, social networks, and aggregate behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 1129-1148, July.
    15. Jakob Grazzini & Domenico Massaro, 2016. "Dispersed Information and the Origins of Aggregate Fluctuations," CESifo Working Paper Series 5957, CESifo.
    16. Marcos Fernandes, 2019. "Confirmation Bias in Social Networks," Department of Economics Working Papers 19-05, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    17. Arieli, Itai & Babichenko, Yakov & Shlomov, Segev, 2021. "Virtually additive learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Buechel, Berno & Klößner, Stefan & Meng, Fanyuan & Nassar, Anis, 2023. "Misinformation due to asymmetric information sharing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    20. Nicolás Ajzenman & Bruno Ferman & Pedro C. Sant’Anna, 2023. "Rooting for the Same Team: On the Interplay between Political and Social Identities in the Formation of Social Ties," Working Papers 231, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2202.12453. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.