IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2022-151-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific Disagreements and the Diagnosticity of Evidence: How Too Much Data May Lead to Polarization

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Scientific disagreements sometimes persist even if scientists fully share results of their research. In this paper we develop an agent-based model to study the impact of diverging diagnostic values scientists may assign to the evidence, given their different background assumptions, on the emergence of polarization in the scientific community. Our results suggest that an initial disagreement on the diagnostic value of evidence can, but does not necessarily, lead to polarization, depending on the sample size of the performed studies and the confidence interval within which scientists share their opinions. In particular, the more data scientists share, the more likely it is that the community will end up polarized.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Michelini & Javier Osorio & Wybo Houkes & Dunja Å eÅ¡elja & Christian Straßer, 2023. "Scientific Disagreements and the Diagnosticity of Evidence: How Too Much Data May Lead to Polarization," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 26(4), pages 1-5.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2022-151-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/26/4/5/5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:2022-151-2. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.