IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Can Opinion Be Stable In An Open Network With Hierarchy?An Agent-Based Model Of The Commercial Court Of Paris

Listed author(s):
  • Juliette Rouchier


    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - Université de la Méditerranée - Aix-Marseille 2 - Université Paul Cézanne - Aix-Marseille 3 - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - ECM - Ecole Centrale de Marseille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Paola Tubaro


    (CMH - Centre Maurice Halbwachs - UNICAEN - Université Caen Normandie - ENS Paris - École normale supérieure - Paris - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

The co-evolution of social networks and opinion formation has received increasing attention in recent years. As a contribution to the growing literature on this topic, we explore connections between empirical data representing the advice network of judges at the Commercial Court in Paris and an agent-based simulation protocol testing various hypotheses on the motives that drive agent behaviors. A previous work (Rouchier et al. 2007) had already modeled the dynamics of advice-seeking among judges and studied the implications of different rationality assumptions on the shape of the emerging network. Here, we add an influence model to the previously examined advice-seeking relationships in order to explore the possibility that there is a form of “culture” at the Court that harmonizes the opinions of members over time; we identify a set of relevant stylized facts, and we use new indicators to evaluate how agents choose with whom to interact within this framework. The basic assumptions we analyze are that they seek advice from senior judges who are higher up in the hierarchy, who enjoy high reputation, or who are similar to them. Our simulations test which criterion –or which combination of criteria– is most credible, by comparing both the properties of the emerging network and the dynamics of opinion at the Court to the stylized facts. Our results single out the combination of criteria that most likely guide individuals' selection of advisors and provide insight into their effects on opinion formation.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by HAL in its series Working Papers with number halshs-00409373.

in new window

Date of creation: 07 Aug 2009
Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00409373
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server:
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:hal:wpaper:halshs-00409373. 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: (CCSD)

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.