Abstract
Most models of opinion dynamics are threshold-like. For two competing opinions the dynamics is one-dimensional and the associated opinion flow is shaped by at least two attractors separated by a tipping threshold, not necessarily located at 50 %. Initial supports are thus instrumental to determine the final debate outcome. In contrast, the absence of a tipping threshold implies a unique attractor making the initial conditions irrelevant. One of the opinions is predetermined to become the majority whatever initial support it has. Accordingly, to make a threshold dynamics non threshold appears to be an instrumental strategic option. An illustration of the possibility of such a reshaping of the opinion dynamics geometry is given using the Galam sequential opinion dynamics model. The key parameters are pair interactions and inflexible or stubborn agents. A new and counter intuitive light is shed on the design of winning strategies in public issues. However the findings pose ethical issues. The case of global warming is discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behera L, Schweitzer F (2003) On spatial consensus formation: is the Sznajd model different from a voter model? Int J Mod Phys C 14(10):13311354. doi:10.1142/S0129183103005467
Castellano C, Fortunato S, Loreto V (2009) Statistical physics of social dynamics. Rev Mod Phys 81(2):591646. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.81.591
Contucci P, Ghirlanda S (2007) Modeling society with statistical mechanics: an application to cultural contact and immigration. Qual Quant 41(4):569578. doi:10.1007/s11135-007-9071-9
Galam S (2002) Minority opinion spreading in random geometry. Eur Phys J B 25(4):403406. doi:10.1140/epjb/e20020045
Galam S (2005a) Heterogeneous beliefs, segregation, and extremism in the making of public opinions. Phys Rev E 71(4):04612315. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.71.046123
Galam S (2005b) Local dynamics vs. social mechanisms: a unifying frame. Eur Lett 70(6):705711
Galam S (2005c) Les mathmatiques s invitent dans le dbat europen. Interview by P. Lehir. Le Monde, p 23
Galam S, Jacobs F (2007) The role of inflexible minorities in the breaking of democratic opinion dynamics. Phys A 381:366376. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2007.03.034
Galam S (2008a) Global warming: a social phenomena, complexity and security. In: Ramsden JJ, Kervalishvili PJ (eds) The NATO Science for Peace and Security Programme, Chap 13. Les scientifiques ont perdu le Nord, Plon, Paris
Galam S (2008b) Sociophysics: a review of Galam models. Int J Mod Phys C 19(03):409440. doi:10.1142/S0129183108012297
Galam S (2010) Public debates driven by incomplete scientific data: the cases of evolution theory, global warming and H1N1 pandemic influenza. Phys A 389:3619–3631
Galam S (2011) Collective beliefs versus individual inflexibility: the unavoidable biases of a public debate. Phys A 390:3036–3054
Galam S (2012) Sociophysics: a physicists modeling of psycho-political phenomena. Springer, Berlin
Gerlich G, Tscheuschner RD (2009) Falsification of the atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effects within the frame of physics. Int J Mod Phys B 23:275–364
Gonzlez MC, Sousa AO, Herrmann HJ (2004) Opinion formation on a deterministic pseudo-fractal network. Int J Mod Phys C 15(1):4557. doi:10.1142/S0129183104005577
Knutti R (2008) Hotter or not? Should we believe model predictions of future climate change? Significance 5:159–162
Kulakowski K, Nawojczyk M (2008) The Galam model of minority opinion spreading and the marriage gap. Int J Mod Phys C 19(04):611615. doi:10.1142/S0129183108012327
Lambiotte R, Ausloos M (2007) Coexistence of opposite opinions in a network with communities. J Stat Mech Theory Exp 2007:P08026
Martins ACR (2008) Mobility and social network effects on extremist opinions. Phys Rev E 78(3):036104. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.78.036104
Martins ACR, Pereira CB, Vicente R (2009) An opinion dynamics model for the diffusion of innovations. Phys A 388(15–16):32253232. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2009.04.007
Martins A, Galam S (2013) Building up of individual inflexibility in opinion dynamics. Phys Rev E 87:042807
Mobilia M, Redner S (2003) Majority versus minority dynamics: phase transition in an interacting two-state spin system. Phys Rev E 68(4):046106. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.68.046106
Schneider JJ, Hirtreiter C (2005) The impact of election results on the member numbers of the large parties in Bavaria and Germany. Int J Mod Phys C 16(08):11651215. doi:10.1142/S0129183105007820
Sousa AO, Sanchez JR (2006) Outward–inward information flux in an opinion formation model on different topologies. Phys A 361:319–328
Stauffer D, de Oliveira SM, De Oliveira P, Sa Martins J (2006) Biology, sociology, geology by computational physicists. Elsevier, Amsterdam. doi:10.1016/S1574-6917(05)01001-9
Sznajd-Weron K, Sznajd J (2000) Opinion evolution in closed community. Int J Mod Phys C 11(06):11571165. doi:10.1142/S0129183100000936
Tessone CJ, Toral R, Amengual P, Wio HS (2004) Neighborhood models of minority opinion spreading. Eur Phys J B 39(4):535–544. doi:10.1140/epjb/e2004-00227-5
Wikipedia (a). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_model
Wikipedia (b). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Galam, S. Stubbornness as an unfortunate key to win a public debate: an illustration from sociophysics. Mind Soc 15, 117–130 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-015-0175-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-015-0175-y