IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i2p228-d1316716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From the DeGroot Model to the DeGroot-Non-Consensus Model: The Jump States and the Frozen Fragment States

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaolan Qian

    (College of Media Engineering, Communication University of Zhejiang, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Wenchen Han

    (College of Physics and Electronic Engineering, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610101, China)

  • Junzhong Yang

    (School of Science, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China)

Abstract

Non-consensus phenomena are widely observed in human society, but more attention is paid to consensus phenomena. One famous consensus model is the DeGroot model, and there are a series of outstanding works derived from it. By introducing the cognition bias, resulting in over-confidence and under-confidence in the DeGroot model, we propose a non-consensus model, namely the DeGroot-Non-Consensus model. It bridges consensus phenomena and non-consensus phenomena. While different in meaning, the new opinion model can reproduce the DeGroot model’s behaviors and supply a series of interesting non-consensus states. We find frozen fragment states for the over-confident population and time-dependent states for strong interaction strength. In frozen fragment states, the population is polarized into opinion clusters formed by extremists. In time-dependent states, agents jump between two opinions that only differ in the sign, which provides a possible explanation for the swing in opinions in elections and the fluctuations in open questions in the absence of external information. All of these states are summarized in the phase diagrams of the self-confidence and the interaction strength plane. Moreover, the transition scenarios along different parameter paths are studied. Meanwhile, the influence of the nodes’ degree is illustrated in the phase diagrams and the relationship is given. The finite size effect is found in the not quite over-confident population. An interesting phenomenon for small population sizes is that neutral populations with large opinion variance are robust to the fluctuations induced by a finite population size.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaolan Qian & Wenchen Han & Junzhong Yang, 2024. "From the DeGroot Model to the DeGroot-Non-Consensus Model: The Jump States and the Frozen Fragment States," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-13, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:228-:d:1316716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/2/228/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/2/228/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bearden, William O & Hardesty, David M & Rose, Randall L, 2001. "Consumer Self-Confidence: Refinements in Conceptualization and Measurement," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 121-134, June.
    2. Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron & Józef Sznajd, 2000. "Opinion Evolution In Closed Community," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(06), pages 1157-1165.
    3. Akgiray, Vedat & Booth, G Geoffrey, 1988. "Mixed Diffusion-Jump Process Modeling of Exchange Rate Movements," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(4), pages 631-637, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kaye-Blake, William & Li, Frank Y. & Martin, A. McLeish & McDermott, Alan & Neil, Hayley & Rains, Scott, 2009. "A review of Multi-Agent Simulation Models in Agriculture," 2009 Conference, August 27-28, 2009, Nelson, New Zealand 97165, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Khalaf, Lynda & Saphores, Jean-Daniel & Bilodeau, Jean-Francois, 2003. "Simulation-based exact jump tests in models with conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 531-553, December.
    3. Lu, Xi & Mo, Hongming & Deng, Yong, 2015. "An evidential opinion dynamics model based on heterogeneous social influential power," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 98-107.
    4. Célestin Coquidé & José Lages & Dima Shepelyansky, 2024. "Opinion Formation in the World Trade Network," Post-Print hal-04461784, HAL.
    5. Dimitris Tsintsaris & Milan Tsompanoglou & Evangelos Ioannidis, 2024. "Dynamics of Social Influence and Knowledge in Networks: Sociophysics Models and Applications in Social Trading, Behavioral Finance and Business," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, April.
    6. Hang-Hyun Jo & Jeoung-Yoo Kim, 2012. "Competitive Targeted Marketing," ISER Discussion Paper 0834, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    7. Kaehler, Jürgen & Marnet, Volker, 1993. "Markov-switching models for exchange-rate dynamics and the pricing of foreign-currency options," ZEW Discussion Papers 93-03, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Ricardo Almeida & Agnieszka B. Malinowska & Tatiana Odzijewicz, 2019. "Optimal Leader–Follower Control for the Fractional Opinion Formation Model," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 182(3), pages 1171-1185, September.
    9. McColl-Kennedy, Janet R. & Patterson, Paul G. & Smith, Amy K. & Brady, Michael K., 2009. "Customer Rage Episodes: Emotions, Expressions and Behaviors," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 222-237.
    10. Piotr Przybyła & Katarzyna Sznajd-Weron & Rafał Weron, 2014. "Diffusion Of Innovation Within An Agent-Based Model: Spinsons, Independence And Advertising," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-22.
    11. Verhagen, Tibert & Meents, Selmar, 2007. "A Framework for Developing Semantic Differentials in IS research: Assessing the Meaning of Electronic Marketplace Quality (EMQ)," Serie Research Memoranda 0016, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    12. Guzmán-Vargas, L. & Hernández-Pérez, R., 2006. "Small-world topology and memory effects on decision time in opinion dynamics," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 372(2), pages 326-332.
    13. Tiwari, Mukesh & Yang, Xiguang & Sen, Surajit, 2021. "Modeling the nonlinear effects of opinion kinematics in elections: A simple Ising model with random field based study," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 582(C).
    14. Minjeong Kang & Taeshik Gong, 2019. "Dysfunctional customer behavior: conceptualization and empirical validation," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 13(4), pages 625-646, December.
    15. Katarzyna Ostasiewicz & Michal H. Tyc & Piotr Goliczewski & Piotr Magnuszewski & Andrzej Radosz & Jan Sendzimir, 2006. "Integrating economic and psychological insights in binary choice models with social interactions," Papers physics/0609170, arXiv.org.
    16. Si, Xia-Meng & Wang, Wen-Dong & Ma, Yan, 2016. "Role of propagation thresholds in sentiment-based model of opinion evolution with information diffusion," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 451(C), pages 549-559.
    17. Engel, Charles & Hakkio, Craig S, 1996. "The Distribution of Exchange Rates in the EMS," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 55-67, January.
    18. Aggarwal, Raj & Mougoue, Mbodja, 1996. "Cointegration among Asian currencies: Evidence of the increasing influence of the Japanese yen," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 291-308, September.
    19. Karataieva, Tatiana & Koshmanenko, Volodymyr & Krawczyk, Małgorzata J. & Kułakowski, Krzysztof, 2019. "Mean field model of a game for power," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 525(C), pages 535-547.
    20. Craig E. Landry & Andreas Lange & John A. List & Michael K. Price & Nicholas G. Rupp, 2006. "Toward an Understanding of the Economics of Charity: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 747-782.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:2:p:228-:d:1316716. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.