Introducing the Argumentation Framework Within Agent-Based Models to Better Simulate Agents' Cognition in Opinion Dynamics: Application to Vegetarian Diet Diffusion

Patrick Taillandier,Nicolas Salliou,Rallou Thomopoulos

doi:10.18564/jasss.4531

Abstract

This paper introduces a generic agent-based model simulating the exchange and the di usion of pro and con arguments. It is applied to the case of the di usion of vegetarian diets in the context of a potential emergence of a second nutrition transition. To this day, agent-based simulation has been extensively used to study opinion dynamics. However, the vast majority of existing models have been limited to extremely abstract and simplified representations of the di usion process. These simplifications impairs the realism of the simulations and disables the understanding of the reasons for the shi of an actor's opinion. The generic model presented here explicitly represents exchanges of arguments between actors in the context of an opinion dynamic model. In particular, the inner attitude towards an opinion of each agent is formalized as an argumentation graph and each agent can share arguments with other agents. Simulation experiments show that introducing attacks between arguments and a limitation of the number of arguments mobilized by agents has a strong impact on the evolution of the agents' opinion. We also highlight that when a new argument is introduced into the system, the quantity and the profile of the agents receiving the new argument will impact the evolution of the overall opinion. Finally, the application of this model to vegetarian diet adoption seems consistent with historical food behaviour dynamics observed during crises.

Highlights

We indicated for each argument whether it was pro (+) or con (-) vegetarian diets
We have studied the normal evolution of the system when no new arguments are introduced
We evaluated, during, simulation steps, the mean opinion, the value of polarization, and the number of agents that have the new argument in their argumentation graph

Summary

Introduction

Another approach by Wolf et al ( ) does not directly use arguments but the closely related concept of "need" In this model about electric cars is based on empirical data and each agent assigns a weight to each identified need (e.g., safety, comfort, costs) for each possible action (e.g. using an electric vehicle). It goes on until an agent accepts an attack or ends the dialog This model provides a very interesting basis for integrating Dung’s argumentation system into a model of opinion di usion. . Our proposal is in line with the studies of Butler et al ( a,b) except that we focus on the "daily" exchange of arguments using a general process of evolution of opinion close to Mäs & Flache ( ) and we do not investigate group deliberation.

Literature overview

Conclusion and Perspectives