IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Interacting Agents and Continuous Opinions Dynamics


  • Gérard Weisbuch
  • Guillaume Deffuant
  • Frederic Amblard
  • Jean Pierre Nadal


We present a model of opinion dynamics in which agents adjust continuous opinions as a result of random binary encoun ters whenever their difference in opinion is below a given threshold. High thresholds yield convergence of opinions towards an average opinion, whereas low thresholds result in several opinion clusters. The model is further generalized to network interactions, threshold heterogeneity, adaptive thresholds and binary strings of opinions.

Suggested Citation

  • Gérard Weisbuch & Guillaume Deffuant & Frederic Amblard & Jean Pierre Nadal, 2001. "Interacting Agents and Continuous Opinions Dynamics," Working Papers 01-11-072, Santa Fe Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:safiwp:01-11-072

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Cohen, Joel E. & Hajnal, John & Newman, Charles M., 1986. "Approaching consensus can be delicate when positions harden," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 315-322, July.
    2. Follmer, Hans, 1974. "Random economies with many interacting agents," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 51-62, March.
    3. Orlean, Andre, 1995. "Bayesian interactions and collective dynamics of opinion: Herd behavior and mimetic contagion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 257-274, October.
    4. H. Peyton Young & Mary A. Burke, 2001. "Competition and Custom in Economic Contracts: A Case Study of Illinois Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 559-573, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Rainer Hegselmann, 2009. "Meinungsbildung in Gruppen: Wie tragfaehig sind vereinfachende Modellierungsansaetze?," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 0(8), November.
    4. 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.
    5. Blanco, Iván, 2005. "The silence that precedes hypocrisy: a formal model of the spiral of silence theory," MPRA Paper 45452, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Vilone, Daniele & Carletti, Timoteo & Bagnoli, Franco & Guazzini, Andrea, 2016. "The Peace Mediator effect: Heterogeneous agents can foster consensus in continuous opinion models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 84-91.
    7. 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.

    More about this item


    Dynamics; opinions; norms; bounded rationality; economic choices;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:wop:safiwp:01-11-072. 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: (Thomas Krichel). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.