{"title":"网络规模和信息接收频率对社交网络两极分化的影响","authors":"Sudhakar Krishnarao, Shaja Arul Selvamani","doi":"10.1155/2024/4742401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p>Opinion Dynamics is an interdisciplinary area of research. Disciplines of Psychology and Sociology have proposed models of how individuals form opinions and how social interactions influence this process. Sociophysicists have interpreted the observed patterns in opinion formation in individuals as arising out of nonlinearity in the underlying process and helped shape the models. Agent-based modelling has offered an excellent platform to study the Opinion Dynamics of large groups of interacting individuals. In this paper, we take recent models in opinion formation in individuals. We recast them to create a proper dynamical system and inject the idea of clock time into evolving individuals’ opinions. Thus, the time interval between two successive receipts of new information (i.e., the frequency of information receipts) by an individual becomes a factor that can be studied. In recent decades, social media has continuously shrunk time intervals between receipt of new information (i.e., increased frequency of information receipts). The recast models are used to show that as the time interval between successive receipts of new information gets shorter and the number of individuals in one’s network becomes larger, the propensity for polarization of an individual increases. This explains how social media could have caused polarisation. We use the word “polarisation” to mean an individual’s inability to hold a neutral opinion. A polarisation number based on sociological parameters is proposed. Critical values of the polarisation number beyond which an individual is prone to polarization are identified. These critical values depend on psychological parameters. The reduced time intervals between the receipt of new information and an increase in the size of groups that interact can push the polarisation number to approach and cross the critical value and could have played a crucial role in polarising individuals and social groups. We also define the extent of polarisation as the width of the region around neutral within which an individual is unable to have an opinion. Reported results are for values of model parameters found in the literature. Our findings offer an opportunity to adjust model parameters to align with empirical evidence. The models of opinion formation in individuals and the understanding arrived at in this study will help study Opinion Dynamics with all its nuances and details on large social networks using agent-based modelling.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50653,"journal":{"name":"Complexity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/4742401","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of the Network Size and Frequency of Information Receipt on Polarization in Social Networks\",\"authors\":\"Sudhakar Krishnarao, Shaja Arul Selvamani\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/4742401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p>Opinion Dynamics is an interdisciplinary area of research. Disciplines of Psychology and Sociology have proposed models of how individuals form opinions and how social interactions influence this process. Sociophysicists have interpreted the observed patterns in opinion formation in individuals as arising out of nonlinearity in the underlying process and helped shape the models. Agent-based modelling has offered an excellent platform to study the Opinion Dynamics of large groups of interacting individuals. In this paper, we take recent models in opinion formation in individuals. We recast them to create a proper dynamical system and inject the idea of clock time into evolving individuals’ opinions. Thus, the time interval between two successive receipts of new information (i.e., the frequency of information receipts) by an individual becomes a factor that can be studied. In recent decades, social media has continuously shrunk time intervals between receipt of new information (i.e., increased frequency of information receipts). The recast models are used to show that as the time interval between successive receipts of new information gets shorter and the number of individuals in one’s network becomes larger, the propensity for polarization of an individual increases. This explains how social media could have caused polarisation. We use the word “polarisation” to mean an individual’s inability to hold a neutral opinion. A polarisation number based on sociological parameters is proposed. Critical values of the polarisation number beyond which an individual is prone to polarization are identified. These critical values depend on psychological parameters. The reduced time intervals between the receipt of new information and an increase in the size of groups that interact can push the polarisation number to approach and cross the critical value and could have played a crucial role in polarising individuals and social groups. We also define the extent of polarisation as the width of the region around neutral within which an individual is unable to have an opinion. Reported results are for values of model parameters found in the literature. Our findings offer an opportunity to adjust model parameters to align with empirical evidence. The models of opinion formation in individuals and the understanding arrived at in this study will help study Opinion Dynamics with all its nuances and details on large social networks using agent-based modelling.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Complexity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/4742401\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Complexity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/4742401\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complexity","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/4742401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of the Network Size and Frequency of Information Receipt on Polarization in Social Networks
Opinion Dynamics is an interdisciplinary area of research. Disciplines of Psychology and Sociology have proposed models of how individuals form opinions and how social interactions influence this process. Sociophysicists have interpreted the observed patterns in opinion formation in individuals as arising out of nonlinearity in the underlying process and helped shape the models. Agent-based modelling has offered an excellent platform to study the Opinion Dynamics of large groups of interacting individuals. In this paper, we take recent models in opinion formation in individuals. We recast them to create a proper dynamical system and inject the idea of clock time into evolving individuals’ opinions. Thus, the time interval between two successive receipts of new information (i.e., the frequency of information receipts) by an individual becomes a factor that can be studied. In recent decades, social media has continuously shrunk time intervals between receipt of new information (i.e., increased frequency of information receipts). The recast models are used to show that as the time interval between successive receipts of new information gets shorter and the number of individuals in one’s network becomes larger, the propensity for polarization of an individual increases. This explains how social media could have caused polarisation. We use the word “polarisation” to mean an individual’s inability to hold a neutral opinion. A polarisation number based on sociological parameters is proposed. Critical values of the polarisation number beyond which an individual is prone to polarization are identified. These critical values depend on psychological parameters. The reduced time intervals between the receipt of new information and an increase in the size of groups that interact can push the polarisation number to approach and cross the critical value and could have played a crucial role in polarising individuals and social groups. We also define the extent of polarisation as the width of the region around neutral within which an individual is unable to have an opinion. Reported results are for values of model parameters found in the literature. Our findings offer an opportunity to adjust model parameters to align with empirical evidence. The models of opinion formation in individuals and the understanding arrived at in this study will help study Opinion Dynamics with all its nuances and details on large social networks using agent-based modelling.
期刊介绍:
Complexity is a cross-disciplinary journal focusing on the rapidly expanding science of complex adaptive systems. The purpose of the journal is to advance the science of complexity. Articles may deal with such methodological themes as chaos, genetic algorithms, cellular automata, neural networks, and evolutionary game theory. Papers treating applications in any area of natural science or human endeavor are welcome, and especially encouraged are papers integrating conceptual themes and applications that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries. Complexity is not meant to serve as a forum for speculation and vague analogies between words like “chaos,” “self-organization,” and “emergence” that are often used in completely different ways in science and in daily life.