Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userAgent mental models and Bayesian rules as a tool to create opinion dynamics models
124
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Andre C. R. Martins
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Traditional opinion dynamics models are simple and yet, enough to explore the consequences in basic scenarios. But, to better describe problems such as polarization and extremism, we might need to include details about human biases and other cognitive characteristics. In this paper, I explain how we can describe and use mental models and assumptions of the agents using Bayesian-inspired model building. The relationship between human rationality and Bayesian methods will be explored, and we will see that Bayesian ideas can indeed be used to explain how humans reason. We will see how to use Bayesian-inspired rules using the simplest version of the Continuous Opinions and Discrete Actions (CODA) model. From that, we will explore how we can obtain update rules that include human behavioral characteristics such as confirmation bias, motivated reasoning, or our tendency to change opinions much less than we should. Keywords: Opinion dynamics, Bayesian methods, Cognition, CODA, Agent-based models
rate research
Read More
It is known that individual opinions on different policy issues often align to a dominant ideological dimension (e.g. left vs. right) and become increasingly polarized. We provide an agent-based model that reproduces these two stylized facts as emergent properties of an opinion dynamics in a multi-dimensional space of continuous opinions. The mechanisms for the change of agents opinions in this multi-dimensional space are derived from cognitive dissonance theory and structural balance theory. We test assumptions from proximity voting and from directional voting regarding their ability to reproduce the expected emerging properties. We further study how the emotional involvement of agents, i.e. their individual resistance to change opinions, impacts the dynamics. We identify two regimes for the global and the individual alignment of opinions. If the affective involvement is high and shows a large variance across agents, this fosters the emergence of a dominant ideological dimension. Agents align their opinions along this dimension in opposite directions, i.e. create a state of polarization.
In this article, I investigate the use of Bayesian updating rules applied to modeling social agents in the case of continuos opinions models. Given another agent statement about the continuous value of a variable $x$, we will see that interesting dynamics emerge when an agent assigns a likelihood to that value that is a mixture of a Gaussian and a Uniform distribution. This represents the idea the other agent might have no idea about what he is talking about. The effect of updating only the first moments of the distribution will be studied. and we will see that this generates results similar to those of the Bounded Confidence models. By also updating the second moment, several different opinions always survive in the long run. However, depending on the probability of error and initial uncertainty, those opinions might be clustered around a central value.
Opinion Dynamics lacks a theoretical basis. In this article, I propose to use a decision-theoretic framework, based on the updating of subjective probabilities, as that basis. We will see we get a basic tool for a better understanding of the interaction between the agents in Opinion Dynamics problems and for creating new models. I will review the few existing applications of Bayesian update rules to both discrete and continuous opinion problems and show that several traditional models can be obtained as special cases or approximations from these Bayesian models. The empirical basis and useful properties of the framework will be discussed and examples of how the framework can be used to describe different problems given.
We propose an agent-based model of collective opinion formation to study the wisdom of crowds under social influence. The opinion of an agent is a continuous positive value, denoting its subjective answer to a factual question. The wisdom of crowds states that the average of all opinions is close to the truth, i.e. the correct answer. But if agents have the chance to adjust their opinion in response to the opinions of others, this effect can be destroyed. Our model investigates this scenario by evaluating two competing effects: (i) agents tend to keep their own opinion (individual conviction $beta$), (ii) they tend to adjust their opinion if they have information about the opinions of others (social influence $alpha$). For the latter, two different regimes (full information vs. aggregated information) are compared. Our simulations show that social influence only in rare cases enhances the wisdom of crowds. Most often, we find that agents converge to a collective opinion that is even farther away from the true answer. So, under social influence the wisdom of crowds can be systematically wrong.
Recently, social phenomena have received a lot of attention not only from social scientists, but also from physicists, mathematicians and computer scientists, in the emerging interdisciplinary field of complex system science. Opinion dynamics is one of the processes studied, since opinions are the drivers of human behaviour, and play a crucial role in many global challenges that our complex world and societies are facing: global financial crises, global pandemics, growth of cities, urbanisation and migration patterns, and last but not least important, climate change and environmental sustainability and protection. Opinion formation is a complex process affected by the interplay of different elements, including the individual predisposition, the influence of positive and negative peer interaction (social networks playing a crucial role in this respect), the information each individual is exposed to, and many others. Several models inspired from those in use in physics have been developed to encompass many of these elements, and to allow for the identification of the mechanisms involved in the opinion formation process and the understanding of their role, with the practical aim of simulating opinion formation and spreading under various conditions. These modelling schemes range from binary simple models such as the voter model, to multi-dimensional continuous approaches. Here, we provide a review of recent methods, focusing on models employing both peer interaction and external information, and emphasising the role that less studied mechanisms, such as disagreement, has in driving the opinion dynamics. [...]
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
