Skip to main content

A Bayesian Model of Panic in Belief

Abstract

One common principle in the study of belief is what has been called the “consensual validation of reality”: the idea that persons in highly inbred social networks alter their beliefs regarding the external world by repeated interaction with each other rather than by direct observation. This notion accounts for phenomena such as panics, in which a substantial number of actors in a given population suddenly converge to (typically unsubstantiated) beliefs. In this paper, a Bayesian conditional probability model will be used to explore the conditions necessary for such outcomes, and alternative results will be likewise documented. Finally, suggestions for operationalization of the Bayesian model in experimental research will be given, along with some implications of the theory for common phenomena such as the propagation of ideas by media sources, organizational rumors, and polarization of group opinion.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Aiken, M. and G. Hage (1968), “Organizational Interdependency and Intra-Organizational Structure,” American Sociological Review, 33(1).

  • Anderson, N.H. (1959), “Test of a Model for Opinion Change,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 371-381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N.H. (1964), “Linear Models for Responses Measured on a Continuous Scale,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 121-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N.H. (1971), “Integration Theory and Attitude Change,” Psychological Review, 79, 171-206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, S. (1952), Social Psychology. Prentice Hall, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A.V. (1992), “A Simple Model of Herd Behavior,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(3), 797-817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel, M. (1980), “The Base Rate Fallacy in Probability Judgments,” Acta Psychologia, 44, 211-233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R., S. Hoppe, C.F. Kao, B. Brunsman, B. Linneweh, and D. Rogers (1996a), “Social Corroboration and Opinion Extremity,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 537-560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R., J. Vandello, and B. Brunsman (1996b), “The Forgotten Variable in Conformity Research: Impact of Task Performance on Social Influence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(5), 915-927.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bikhchandani, S., D. Hirshleifer, and I. Welch (1992), “A Theory of Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change,” Journal of Political Economy, 100(5), 992-1026.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, D. (1984), “Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 29.

  • Bulgatz, J. (1992), Ponzi Schemes, Invaders from Mars and More Extraordinary Popular Delusions. Harmony Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (1987), “Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion Versus Structural Equivalence,” American Journal of Sociology, 92, 1287-1335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (1992), Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. (1990a), “Group Stability: A Socio-Cognitive Approach,” Advances in Group Processes, 7.

  • Carley, K. (1990b), “On the Persistence of Beliefs, ” Working Paper, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University.

  • Coleman, J. (1990), Foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. (1988), Rational Choice in an Uncertain World. Harcourt Brace, Fort Worth.

  • Degroot, M. (1989), Probability and Statistics(2nd edition). Addison-Wesley, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. and H.B. Gerard (1955), “A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences upon Individual Judgment,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. and W. Powell (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,” American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, K. (1966), Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (1996), “Dynamic Social Impact Theory and the Study of Human Communication,” Journal of Communication, 46(4), 5-12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedkin, N. and K. Cook (1991), “Peer Group Influence,” Sociological Methods and Research, 19, 122-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, R. and R.R. Alford (1991), “Bringing Society Back in: Symbols, Practices and Institutional Contradictions,” in Powell and DiMaggio (Eds.) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 232-263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galaskiewicz, J. and R. Burt (1991), “Interorganization Contagion in Corporate Philanthropy,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 88-105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. (1973), Designing Complex Organizations. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goel, P. and N.S. Iyengar (Eds.) (1992), Bayesian Analysis in Statistics and Econometrics. Lecture Notes in Statistics, 75, Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, E. and N. Ben-Yehuda (1994), “Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction,” Annual Review of Sociology, 20, 149-171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1982), “The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited,” in Marsden and Lin (Eds.) 1982.

  • Granovetter, M. (1985), “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness,” American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A. Tversky (Eds.) (1982), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,” Econometrica, 47, 263-291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke, D. and J.H. Kuklinski (1982), “Network Analysis,” Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, J. Sullivan and R. Niemi (Eds.), Vol. 28, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt, D. (1996), “Organizational Viscosity and the Diffusion of Controversial Innovations,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology, in press.

  • Latané, B. (1981), “The Psychology of Social Impact,” American Psychologist, 56(4), 343-356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B. and M.J. Bourgeois (1996), “Experimental Evidence for Dynamic Social Impact: The Emergence of Subcultures in Electronic Groups,” Journal of Communication, 46, 35-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B. and T. L'Herrou (1996), “Spatial Clustering in the Conformity Game: Dynamic Social Impact in Electronic Groups,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1218-1230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B. and A. Nowak (1994), “Measuring Emergent Social Phenomena: Dynamism, Polarization, and Clustering as Order Parameters of Social Systems,” Behavioral Science, 39, 1-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lux, T. (1995), “Herd Behaviour, Bubbles and Crashes,” The Economic Journal, 105(431), 881-896.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew, B., J.M. McPherson, T. Rotolo, and L. Smith-Lovin (1995), “Sex and Race Homogeneity in Naturally Occuring Groups,” Social Forces, 74(1), 15-51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. and B. Rowan, (1977), “Institutional Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony,” American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D.L., M.B. Neal, and P. Carder (1997), “The Stability of Core and Peripheral Networks over Time,” Social Networks, 19, 9-25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orléan, A. (1989), “Mimetic Contagion and Speculative Bubbles,” Theory and Decision, 27, 63-92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A., J. Szamrej, and B. Latané (1990), “From Private Attitude to Public Opinion: A Dynamic Theory of Social Impact,” Psychological Review, 97(3), 362-376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, R. and C. Aydin (1991), “Attitudes toward New Organizational Technology: Network Proximity as a Mechanism for Social Information Processing,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 2, 219-244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G. and J. Pfeffer (1978), “A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T.C. (1969), “Models of Segregation,” American Economic Review, 59(2), 483-493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (1991), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. Sage Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1936), The Psychology of Social Norms. Harper, New York.

  • Shiller, R.J. (1995), “Conversation, Information, and Herd Behavior,” American Economic Review, 85(2), 181-185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strogatz, S.H. (1994), Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos. Addison-Wesley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suitor, J. and S. Keeton (1997), “Once a Friend, Always a Friend? Effects of Homophily on Women's Support Networks Across a Decade,” Social Networks, 19, 51-62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor, J.S. (1993), Satanic Panic: The Creation of a Contemporary Legend. Open Court.

  • Victor, J.S. (1995), “The Dangers of Moral Panics,” Skeptic, 3(3), 44-51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S. and K. Faust, (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B., R.Y. Wong, D. Tindal, and N. Nazer (1997) “A Decade of Network Change: Turnover, Persistence and Stability in Personal Communities,” Social Networks, 19, 27-50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Butts, C. A Bayesian Model of Panic in Belief. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 4, 373–404 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009638514137

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009638514137

  • panic
  • belief
  • social influence
  • social networks
  • Bayesian updating