Abstract

We study the q-voter model driven by stochastic noise arising from one out of two types of nonconformity: anticonformity or independence. We compare two approaches that were inspired by the famous psychological controversy known as the person–situation debate. We relate the person approach with the quenched disorder and the situation approach with the annealed disorder, and investigate how these two approaches influence order–disorder phase transitions observed in the q-voter model with noise. We show that under a quenched disorder, differences between models with independence and anticonformity are weaker and only quantitative. In contrast, annealing has a much more profound impact on the system and leads to qualitative differences between models on a macroscopic level. Furthermore, only under an annealed disorder may the discontinuous phase transitions appear. It seems that freezing the agents’ behavior at the beginning of simulation—introducing quenched disorder—supports second-order phase transitions, whereas allowing agents to reverse their attitude in time—incorporating annealed disorder—supports discontinuous ones. We show that anticonformity is insensitive to the type of disorder, and in all cases it gives the same result. We precede our study with a short insight from statistical physics into annealed vs. quenched disorder and a brief review of these two approaches in models of opinion dynamics.

Highlights

  • IntroductionThis question is the essence of the person–situation debate, one of the most significant controversies in the history of personality psychology [1]

  • What is more influential in determining a person’s behavior—personality or situation? This question is the essence of the person–situation debate, one of the most significant controversies in the history of personality psychology [1]

  • We have focused on the q-voter model with independence with a fixed value of parameter describing the size of the group of influence q = 4 [4]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This question is the essence of the person–situation debate, one of the most significant controversies in the history of personality psychology [1]. In the first third of the 20th century, it was possible to believe that social behavior was best understood in terms of personality traits [2]. The best way to predict or explain a person’s behavior in a particular situation would be to examine a personality trait corresponding to the behavior. Nisbett (one of the most eminent social psychologists in the world over the past 40 years), the trait conception as the determinant of social behavior is incorrect. The debate inspired us 3 years ago to compare these two approaches (person vs situation) within a relatively simple yet very interesting model of opinion dynamics—namely, the q-voter model [3,4]

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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