Simplicity and reality in computational modeling of politics

  • Claudio Cioffi-Revilla


Modeling a polity based on viable scientific concepts and theoretical understanding has been a challenge in computational social science and social simulation in general and political science in particular. This paper presents a computational model of a polity (political system) in progressive versions from simple to more realistic. The model, called SimPol to highlight the fundamental structures and processes of politics in a generic society, is developed using the combined methodologies of object-based modeling (OOM), the Unified Modeling Language (UML), and the methodology of Lakatos’ research programs. SimPol demonstrates that computational models of entire political systems are methodologically feasible and scientifically viable; they can also build on and progress beyond previous theory and research to advance our understanding of how polities operate across a variety of domains (simple vs. complex) and levels of analysis (local, national, international). Both simple and realistic models are necessary, for theoretical and empirical purposes, respectively.


Political science Comparative political systems Policy process Systems of governance Agent-based modeling UML unified modeling language Lakatos 


  1. Ambler SW (2005) The elements of UML 2.0 style. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York Google Scholar
  2. Axelrod R (1997) The complexity of cooperation: agent-based models of competition and collaboration. Princeton University Press, Princeton Google Scholar
  3. Axelrod R, Bennett DS (1993) A landscape theory of aggregation. Br J Polit Sci 23(2):211–233 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Axtell RL, Epstein JM (1994) Agent-based modeling: understanding our creations. Bull Santa Fe Inst (Winter):28–32 Google Scholar
  5. Barker J (2005) Beginning Java objects: from concepts to code, 2nd edn. Apress, Berkeley Google Scholar
  6. Birkland TA (2005) An introduction to the policy process: theories, concepts, and models of public policy making, 2nd edn. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, New York Google Scholar
  7. Bruschi A (1990) Conoscenza e metodo: Introduzione alla metodologia delle scienze sociali [Knowledge and method: introduction to the methodology of the social sciences]. Edizioni Scholastiche Bruno Mondadori, Milano Google Scholar
  8. Buckely WF (1967) Sociology and modern systems theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs Google Scholar
  9. Cioffi-Revilla C (1979) Formal international relations theory: an inventory, review, and integration. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY Google Scholar
  10. Cioffi-Revilla C (1998) Politics and uncertainty: theory, models and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York Google Scholar
  11. Cioffi-Revilla C (2005) A canonical theory of origins and development of social complexity. J Math Sociol 29(April–June):133–153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cioffi-Revilla C, Romero PP (2008) Modeling uncertainty in adversary behavior: attacks in Diyala province, Iraq, 2002–2006. Stud Confl Terror 31(11) (in press) Google Scholar
  13. Cioffi-Revilla C, Luke S, Parker DC, Rogers JD, Fitzhugh WW, Honeychurch W, Frohlich B, DePriest P, Bazarsad N (2006) Agent-based dynamics of social complexity: modeling adaptive behavior and long-term change in inner Asia. In: Proceedings of the first world congress on social simulation, Kyoto, Japan, August 21–25, 2006 Google Scholar
  14. Dahl RA (ed) (1984) Modern political analysis, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs Google Scholar
  15. de Marchi S (2005) Computational and mathematical modeling in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  16. Deutsch KW (1948–49) Some notes on research on the role of models in natural and social science. Synthese 532–533 Google Scholar
  17. Deutsch KW (1963) The nerves of government. Free Press, New York Google Scholar
  18. Easton D (1953) The political system: an inquiry into the study of political science. Alfred A. Knopf, New York Google Scholar
  19. Easton D (1964) The political system. Alfred A. Knopf, New York Google Scholar
  20. Easton D (1965) A framework for political analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs Google Scholar
  21. Eisenstadt SN (1963) The political systems of empires. Free Press, New York Google Scholar
  22. Eriksson H-E, Penker M, Lyons B, Fado D (2004) UML 2 toolkit. Wiley, New York Google Scholar
  23. Ferguson YH, Mansbach RW (1996) Polities: authority, identities, and change. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia Google Scholar
  24. Foweraker J, Landman T (2002) Constitutional design and democratic performance. Democratization 9(2):43–66 Google Scholar
  25. Gilbert N, Troitzsch K (2005) Simulation for the social scientist, 2nd edn. Open University Press, Buckingham and Philadelphia Google Scholar
  26. Gillespie JV, Zinnes DA (1975) Progressions in mathematical models of international conflict. Synthese 31(2):289–321 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holland JH (1995) Hidden order: how adaptation builds complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading Google Scholar
  28. Kingdon JW (1995) Agendas, alternatives and public policies, 2nd edn. Harper Collins, New York Google Scholar
  29. Kollman K, Miller JH, Page SE (eds) (2003) Computational models in political economy. The MIT Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  30. Lakatos I (1973) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A (eds) Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  31. Landau M (1979) Political theory and political science: studies in the methodology of political inquiry. Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands Google Scholar
  32. Landman T (2003) Issues and methods in comparative politics: an introduction, 2nd edn. Routledge, London and New York Google Scholar
  33. Lau Y-T (2001) The art of objects: object-oriented design and architecture. Addison-Wesley, Boston Google Scholar
  34. Lave CA, March JG (1993) An introduction to models in the social sciences. University Press of America, Lanham Google Scholar
  35. Laver M (2005) Policy and the dynamics of political competition. Am Polit Sci Rev 99(2):263–281 Google Scholar
  36. Lijphart A (1999) Patterns of democracy: government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. Yale University Press, New Haven Google Scholar
  37. Lustick I (1997) Lijphart, Lakatos, and consociationalism. World Polit 50(1):88–117 Google Scholar
  38. Moore WH (2001) Evaluating theory in political science. Tallahassee: Department of Political Science, The Florida State University. Working paper Google Scholar
  39. Rogers JD, Cioffi-Revilla C (2008) Expanding empires and the analysis of change. In: Pohl E (ed) Mongolian archaeology. Bonn University Press, Bonn Google Scholar
  40. Sartori G (1994) Comparative constitutional engineering: an inquiry into structures, incentives, and outcomes. Macmillan, London Google Scholar
  41. Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the artificial, 3rd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  42. Starr H (2000) Substitutability in foreign policy. J Confl Resolut 44(1):128–138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taber CS, Timpone RJ (1996) Computational modeling. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, London and New Delhi Google Scholar
  44. Weisfeld M (2004) The object-oriented thought process, 2nd edn. Developer’s Library, Indianapolis Google Scholar
  45. Wiener N (1948) Cybernetics: or control and communication in the animal and the machine, 2nd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge Google Scholar
  46. Wiener N (1950) The human use of human beings. Doubleday, New York Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Social Complexity, Krasnow Institute for Advanced StudyGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations