Abstract

A polarised society is frequently observed among ideological extremes, despite individual and collective efforts to reach a consensual opinion. Human factors, such as the tendency to interact with similar people and the reinforcement of such homophilic interactions or the selective exposure and assimilation to distinct views are some of the mechanisms why opinions might evolve into a more divergent distribution. A complex model in which individuals are exposed to alternating waves of propaganda which fully support different extreme views is considered here within an opinion dynamics model. People exposed to different extreme narratives adopt and share them with their peers based on the persuasiveness of the propaganda and are mixed with their previous opinions based on the volatility of opinions to form a new individual view. Social networks help capture elements such as homophily, whilst persuasiveness and memory capture bias assimilation and the exposure to ideas inside and outside echo chambers. The social levels of homophily and polarisation after iterations of people being exposed to extreme narratives define distinct trajectories of society becoming more or less homophilic and reaching extremism or consensus. There is extreme sensitivity to the parameters so that a small perturbation to the persuasiveness or the memory of a network in which consensus is reached could lead to the polarisation of opinions, but there is also unpredictability of the system since even under the same starting point, a society could follow substantially different trajectories and end with a consensual opinion or with extreme polarising views.

Highlights

  • Polarisation, or even fragmentation among many opinions, might be one of the emergent states of collective opinion dynamics, where contrasting ideas might co-exist as a steady state in a society

  • Since all individuals interact with others, the homophily is reduced when polarisation increases

  • Most rounds of propaganda tend to increase the level of polarisation, but after repetition, most of the propaganda rounds increase the level of homophily

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Modelling some aspects of our society is challenging at an individual and at a collective level. Just a few years ago it was impossible to use the right amount of data or to model more than just a few aspects of the individuals, but today we are capable of simulating large human systems [4] with more complex interactions between its members and its environment [5]; to understand the emergence of crowd behaviour in different situations and to challenge and, in some cases, to measure, some of the theories which are frequently applied across some scientific fields [6]. Many features observed at a social level are an emergent behaviour that results from interactions at a personal level and feedbacks between society and its individuals. There are feedbacks between individual opinions and their collective perceptions and ideas

Polarised opinions
Homophilic opinions
Modelling opinions and its dynamics
The key ingredients in opinion dynamics models
Measuring polarisation and homophily
An opinion dynamics model
Results
Parameter space
Conclusions
What is different between a highly polarised society and one with little polarisation
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.