Cognitive perspectives on opinion dynamics: the role of knowledge in consensus formation, opinion divergence, and group polarization

Abstract

Two phenomena that are central to simulation research on opinion dynamics are opinion divergence-the result that individuals interacting in a group do not always collapse to a single viewpoint, and group polarization-the result that average group opinions can become more extreme after discussions than they were to begin with. Standard approaches to modeling these dynamics have typically assumed that agents have an influence bound, such that individuals ignore opinions that differ from theirs by more than some threshold, and thus converge to distinct groups that remain uninfluenced by other distinct beliefs. Additionally, models have attempted to account for group polarization either by assuming the existence of recalcitrant extremists, who draw others to their view without being influenced by them, or negative reaction-movement in opinion space away from those they disagree with. Yet these assumptions are not well supported by existing social/ cognitive theory and data, and insofar as there are data, it is often mixed. Moreover, an alternative cognitive assumption is able to produce both of these phenomena: the need for consistency within a set of related beliefs. Via simulation, we show that assumptions about knowledge or belief spaces and conceptual coherence naturally produce both convergence to distinct groups and group polarization, providing an alternative cognitively grounded mechanism for these phenomena.

An analysis of the link between individual identity traits and radical party choice

“…We speculate that the process of voting for the far right might lead to a delayed change in the political self-assessment of voters, but this remains an open avenue for upcoming research. Furthermore, given the strong performances of radical parties of various political colors and the diminishing strength of Europe's political center (in effect the flattening of election results to the benefit of the fringes) it becomes worthwhile to investigate how said self-political identification and acquiescence interacts with the growing polarization of electorates (Mueller and Tan, 2018, ). Increasing ideological divides among the public, as well as the trending mediatization of new cleavages (or confrontations between groups such as PEGIDA vs ANTIFA) speak to the growing discussion about so called 'echo-chambers' enabled by new social media, and their influence on political dialogue (Leeper, 2014).…”

Disparity of Density in the Age of Mobility: Analysis by Opinion Formation Model

“…Depending on the assumptions, different outcomes have been predicted. These include cases wherein the opinions of all agents converge to one, wherein several opinions are juxtaposed, and wherein extreme opinions or polarizations emerge [58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66].…”

Modeling and simulation analysis of public opinion polarization in a dynamic network environment

“…Schmidt et al have found by evaluating the users' attitude toward the vaccination on Facebook that the content consumption related to the vaccine is mainly determined by the echo chamber effect, and the polarization phenomenon has become increasingly obvious over time. Mueller and Tan believed that in a one‐dimensional opinion space, drift and collapse are almost inevitable, and the behavior at group‐level is related to the formation of consensus, stable disagreement, and group polarization, even without the consideration of limited impact or stubborn extremists. Fu and Zhang proposed an individual‐based biased assimilation model to study the opinions trend on connected social networks.…”