IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2007-60-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opinion Dynamics: the Effect of the Number of Peers Met at Once

Author

Abstract

The opinion dynamics model introduced by Deffuant and Weisbuch as well as the one by Hegselmann and Krause are rather similar. In both models individuals are assumed to have opinions about an issue, they meet and discuss, and they may adapt their opinions towards the other agents` opinions or may ignore each other if their positions are too different. Both models differ with respect to the number of peers they meet at once. Furthermore the model by Deffuant and Weisbuch has a convergence parameter that controls how fast agents adapt their opinions. By defining the reversed parameter as self-support we can extend the applicability of this parameter to scenarios with more than one interaction partner. We investigate the effects of changing the number of peers met at once, which is done for different population sizes, and the effects of changing the self-support. For describing the dynamics we look at different statistics, i.e. number of cluster, number of major clusters, and Gini coefficient.

Suggested Citation

  • Diemo Urbig & Jan Lorenz & Heiko Herzberg, 2008. "Opinion Dynamics: the Effect of the Number of Peers Met at Once," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11(2), pages 1-4.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2007-60-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/11/2/4/4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Guillaume Deffuant & Frederic Amblard & Gérard Weisbuch, 2002. "How Can Extremism Prevail? a Study Based on the Relative Agreement Interaction Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(4), pages 1-1.
    3. Diemo Urbig, 2003. "Attitude Dynamics with Limited Verbalisation Capabilities," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(1), pages 1-2.
    4. Ben-Naim, E & Krapivsky, P.L & Vazquez, F & Redner, S, 2003. "Unity and discord in opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 330(1), pages 99-106.
    5. Gérard Weisbuch & Guillaume Deffuant & Frederic Amblard & Jean Pierre Nadal, 2001. "Interacting Agents and Continuous Opinions Dynamics," Working Papers 01-11-072, Santa Fe Institute.
    6. Amblard, Frédéric & Deffuant, Guillaume, 2004. "The role of network topology on extremism propagation with the relative agreement opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 343(C), pages 725-738.
    7. Lorenz, Jan, 2005. "A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 355(1), pages 217-223.
    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. Jalili, Mahdi, 2013. "Social power and opinion formation in complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(4), pages 959-966.
    2. François Rebaudo & Verónica Crespo-Pérez & Jean-François Silvain & Olivier Dangles, 2011. "Agent-Based Modeling of Human-Induced Spread of Invasive Species in Agricultural Landscapes: Insights from the Potato Moth in Ecuador," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(3), pages 1-7.
    3. Juliette Rouchier & Emily Tanimura, 2016. "Learning with Communication Barriers Due to Overconfidence. What a "Model-To-Model Analysis" Can Add to the Understanding of a Problem," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(2), pages 1-7.
    4. Iris Lorscheid & Matthias Meyer, 2021. "Toward a better understanding of team decision processes: combining laboratory experiments with agent-based modeling," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1431-1467, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Gary Mckeown & Noel Sheehy, 2006. "Mass Media and Polarisation Processes in the Bounded Confidence Model of Opinion Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11.
    6. 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.
    7. Evangelos Ioannidis & Nikos Varsakelis & Ioannis Antoniou, 2020. "Promoters versus Adversaries of Change: Agent-Based Modeling of Organizational Conflict in Co-Evolving Networks," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Rainer Hegselmann & Ulrich Krause, 2006. "Truth and Cognitive Division of Labour: First Steps Towards a Computer Aided Social Epistemology," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10.
    9. Fan, Kangqi & Pedrycz, Witold, 2015. "Emergence and spread of extremist opinions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 436(C), pages 87-97.
    10. Pedraza, Lucía & Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Saintier, Nicolas & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2021. "An analytical formulation for multidimensional continuous opinion models," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    11. Victorien Barbet & Noé Guiraud & Vincent Laperrière & Juliette Rouchier, 2019. "Haggling on Values: Towards Consensus or Trouble," AMSE Working Papers 1909, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    12. Laurent Salzarulo, 2006. "A Continuous Opinion Dynamics Model Based on the Principle of Meta-Contrast," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13.
    13. Jalili, Mahdi, 2013. "Social power and opinion formation in complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(4), pages 959-966.
    14. Cheng, Zhichao & Xiong, Yang & Xu, Yiwen, 2016. "An opinion diffusion model with decision-making groups: The influence of the opinion’s acceptability," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 461(C), pages 429-438.
    15. Liu, Qipeng & Wang, Xiaofan, 2013. "Social learning with bounded confidence and heterogeneous agents," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(10), pages 2368-2374.
    16. Deffuant, Guillaume & Huet, Sylvie, 2007. "Propagation effects of filtering incongruent information," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 816-825, August.
    17. Deng, Lei & Liu, Yun & Xiong, Fei, 2013. "An opinion diffusion model with clustered early adopters," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(17), pages 3546-3554.
    18. 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).
    19. Martins, André C.R., 2022. "Extremism definitions in opinion dynamics models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 589(C).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Opinion Dynamics; Communication Regime;

    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:jas:jasssj:2007-60-2. 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.