IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20090052.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Power and Satisfaction in Societies with Opinion Leaders: Dictator and Opinion Leader Properties

Author

Listed:
  • René van den Brink

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Agnieszka Rusinowska

    (Université Lumière Lyon)

  • Frank Steffen

    (The University of Liverpool - Management School (ULMS))

Abstract

See also the publication in 'Social Choice and Welfare', 2013, 41, 671-683. A well known and established model in communication policy in sociology and marketing is that of opinion leadership. Opinion leaders are actors in a society who are able to affect the behavior of other members called followers. Hence, opinion leaders might have a considerable impact on the behavior of markets and other social agglomerations being made up of individual actors choosing among different alternatives. For marketing or policy purposes it is interesting to investigate the effect of different opinion leader-follower structures in markets or other collective decision-making situations in a society. We study a two-action model in which the members of a society are to choose one action, for instance, to buy or not to buy a certain joint product, or to vote yes or no on a specific proposal. Each of the actors has an inclination to choose one of the actions. By definition opinion leaders have some power over their followers, and they exercise this power by influencing the behavior of their followers, i.e. their choice of action. After all actors have chosen their actions, a decision-making mechanism determines the collective choice resulting from the individual choices. Using bipartite digraphs we introduce satisfaction and power scores which allow us to analyze the actors' satisfaction and power with respect to the collective choice for societies with different opinion leader-follower structures. Moreover, we study common dictator and opinion leader properties of the above scores and illustrate our findings for a society with five members.

Suggested Citation

  • René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2009. "Measuring Power and Satisfaction in Societies with Opinion Leaders: Dictator and Opinion Leader Properties," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-052/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20090052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/09052.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annick Laruelle & Federico Valenciano, 2005. "Assessing success and decisiveness in voting situations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 24(1), pages 171-197, January.
    2. Edward M. Bolger, 2000. "A consistent value for games with n players and r alternatives," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 29(1), pages 93-99.
    3. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence with an ordered set of possible actions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 635-656, October.
    4. René Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2013. "Measuring power and satisfaction in societies with opinion leaders: an axiomatization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(3), pages 671-683, September.
    5. Philip Straffin, 1977. "Homogeneity, independence, and power indices," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 107-118, June.
    6. Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Graphs and Cooperation in Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 225-229, August.
    7. Tchantcho, Bertrand & Lambo, Lawrence Diffo & Pongou, Roland & Engoulou, Bertrand Mbama, 2008. "Voters' power in voting games with abstention: Influence relation and ordinal equivalence of power theories," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 335-350, September.
    8. repec:hal:pseose:hal-00756720 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Edward M. Bolger, 2002. "Characterizations of two power indices for voting games with r alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(4), pages 709-721.
    10. Josep Freixas & William S. Zwicker, 2003. "Weighted voting, abstention, and multiple levels of approval," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 21(3), pages 399-431, December.
    11. Bolger, E M, 1986. "Power Indices for Multicandidate Voting Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 15(3), pages 175-186.
    12. Lehrer, E, 1988. "An Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 17(2), pages 89-99.
    13. Josep Freixas, 2005. "Banzhaf Measures for Games with Several Levels of Approval in the Input and Output," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 45-66, July.
    14. René van den Brink & Peter Borm, 2002. "Digraph Competitions and Cooperative Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 327-342, December.
    15. Haller, Hans, 1994. "Collusion Properties of Values," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 23(3), pages 261-281.
    16. Granovetter, Mark & Soong, Roland, 1986. "Threshold models of interpersonal effects in consumer demand," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 83-99, March.
    17. Dan S. Felsenthal & Moshé Machover, 1998. "The Measurement of Voting Power," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1489.
    18. Pradeep Dubey & Lloyd S. Shapley, 1979. "Mathematical Properties of the Banzhaf Power Index," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 99-131, May.
    19. Dan S. Felsenthal & MoshÚ Machover, 2002. "Models and Reality: the Curios Case of the Absent Abstention," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 19, pages 297-310.
    20. Shapley, L. S. & Shubik, Martin, 1954. "A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 787-792, September.
    21. Bolger, Edward M, 1993. "A Value for Games with n Players and r Alternatives," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 22(4), pages 319-334.
    22. Sitabhra Sinha & S. Raghavendra, 2006. "Emergence of two-phase behavior in markets through interaction and learning in agents with bounded rationality," Springer Books, in: Hideki Takayasu (ed.), Practical Fruits of Econophysics, pages 200-204, Springer.
    23. Hsiao Chih-Ru & Raghavan T. E. S., 1993. "Shapley Value for Multichoice Cooperative Games, I," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 240-256, April.
    24. Rae, Douglas W., 1969. "Decision-Rules and Individual Values in Constitutional Choice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(1), pages 40-56, March.
    25. René Brink, 2010. "Axiomatizations of Banzhaf permission values for games with a permission structure," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 445-466, July.
    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. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence with an ordered set of possible actions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 635-656, October.
    2. Francis Aniefiok Bassey & John Nsikan Efiok & Okon & Saviour Sylvester & Inegbedion Daniel Osemudiamen, 2015. "Opinion Leadership and Marketing of Life Assurance in Selected Insurance Firms in Nigeria," International Journal of Empirical Finance, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 4(3), pages 131-141.
    3. René Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2013. "Measuring power and satisfaction in societies with opinion leaders: an axiomatization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(3), pages 671-683, September.
    4. René van den Brink, 2009. "Comparable Axiomatizations of the Myerson Value, the Restricted Banzhaf Value, Hierarchical Outcomes and the Average Tree Solution for Cycle-Free Graph Restricted Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-108/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "Different Approaches to Influence Based on Social Networks and Simple Games," Post-Print hal-00514850, HAL.
    6. Gusev, Vasily V., 2020. "The vertex cover game: Application to transport networks," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. René van den Brink & Frank Steffen, 2012. "On the Measurement of Success and Satisfaction," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-030/1, Tinbergen Institute.

    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. René Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2013. "Measuring power and satisfaction in societies with opinion leaders: an axiomatization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(3), pages 671-683, September.
    2. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence with an ordered set of possible actions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 635-656, October.
    3. Grabisch, Michel & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2011. "A model of influence with a continuum of actions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 576-587.
    4. Sascha Kurz, 2014. "Measuring Voting Power in Convex Policy Spaces," Economies, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-33, March.
    5. Grabisch, Michel & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2011. "Influence functions, followers and command games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 123-138, May.
    6. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2009. "A model of influence with a continuum of actions," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00464460, HAL.
    7. Freixas, Josep & Zwicker, William S., 2009. "Anonymous yes-no voting with abstention and multiple levels of approval," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 428-444, November.
    8. Kurz, Sascha & Mayer, Alexander & Napel, Stefan, 2021. "Influence in weighted committees," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    9. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2021. "An Appropriate Way to Extend the Banzhaf Index for Multiple Levels of Approval," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 447-462, April.
    10. Josep Freixas & Roberto Lucchetti, 2016. "Power in voting rules with abstention: an axiomatization of a two components power index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 455-474, September.
    11. Sébastien Courtin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Bertrand Tchantcho, 2016. "The Shapley–Shubik power index for dichotomous multi-type games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 413-426, September.
    12. Josep Freixas, 2005. "Banzhaf Measures for Games with Several Levels of Approval in the Input and Output," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 45-66, July.
    13. Freixas, Josep, 2012. "Probabilistic power indices for voting rules with abstention," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 89-99.
    14. Friedman, Jane & Parker, Cameron, 2018. "The conditional Shapley–Shubik measure for ternary voting games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 379-390.
    15. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2007. "Influence Indices," Post-Print halshs-00142479, HAL.
    16. Courtin, Sébastien & Nganmeni, Zéphirin & Tchantcho, Bertrand, 2017. "Dichotomous multi-type games with a coalition structure," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 9-17.
    17. M. Álvarez-Mozos & O. Tejada, 2015. "The Banzhaf value in the presence of externalities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(4), pages 781-805, April.
    18. Annick Laruelle & Federico Valenciano, 2005. "A critical reappraisal of some voting power paradoxes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 17-41, July.
    19. René van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Frank Steffen, 2013. "Measuring Power and Satisfaction in Societies with Opinion Leaders," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-00756720, HAL.
    20. Pongou, Roland & Tchantcho, Bertrand & Tedjeugang, Narcisse, 2014. "Power theories for multi-choice organizations and political rules: Rank-order equivalence," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 42-49.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bipartite digraph; influence; inclination; collective choice; opinion leader; follower; satisfaction; power; dictator properties; opinion leader properties;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making

    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:tin:wpaper:20090052. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    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.