IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

How Groups Can Foster Consensus: The Case of Local Cultures

A local culture denotes a set of rules on business behaviour among firms in a cluster. Similar to social norms or conventions, it is an emergent feature of interaction in an economic network. To model its emergence, we consider a distributed agent population, representing cluster firms. Further, we build on a continuous opinion dynamics model with bounded confidence (ε), which assumes that two agents only interact if differences in their behaviour are less than ε. Interaction results in more similarity of behaviour, i.e. convergence towards a common mean. Two aspects extend this framework: (i) The agent's in-group consisting of acquainted interaction partners is explicitly taken into account, leading to an effective agent behaviour as agents try to continue to interact with past partners and thus seek to stay sufficiently close to them. (ii) The in-group network structure changes over time, as agents form new links to other agents with sufficiently close effective behaviour or delete links to agents no longer close in behaviour. Thus, the model introduces a feedback mechanism of agent behaviour and in-group structure. Studying its consequences by means of agent-based computer simulations, we find that for narrow-minded agents (low ε) the feedback mechanism helps find consensus more often, whereas for open-minded agents (high ε) this does not necessarily hold. Overall, the dynamics of agent interaction in clusters as modelled here, are conducive to consensus among all or a majority of agents.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/2/4/4.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation in its journal Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation.

Volume (Year): 12 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 1-4

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2008-43-2
Contact details of provider:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. 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.
  2. Thomas Fent & Patrick Groeber & Frank Schweitzer, 2007. "Coexistence Of Social Norms Based On In- And Out-Group Interactions," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(02), pages 271-286.
  3. Peter V. Marsden & Noah E. Friedkin, 1993. "Network Studies of Social Influence," Sociological Methods & Research, SAGE Publishing, vol. 22(1), pages 127-151, August.
  4. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Third Party Punishment and Social Norms," IEW - Working Papers 106, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  5. Markus M. Geipel, 2007. "Self-Organization Applied To Dynamic Network Layout," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(10), pages 1537-1549.
  6. Sugden, Robert, 1989. "Spontaneous Order," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 85-97, Fall.
  7. F. Schweitzer & L. Behera, 2009. "Nonlinear voter models: the transition from invasion to coexistence," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 67(3), pages 301-318, February.
  8. Ellison, G. & Glaeser, E.L., 1994. "Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach," Working papers 94-27, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  9. Kandel, Eugene & Lazear, Edward P, 1992. "Peer Pressure and Partnerships," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(4), pages 801-817, August.
  10. Allen, Robert C., 1983. "Collective invention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-24, March.
  11. Jan Lorenz, 2007. "Continuous Opinion Dynamics Under Bounded Confidence: A Survey," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(12), pages 1819-1838.
  12. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2008-43-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Flaminio Squazzoni)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.