Abstract
There is increasing societal and scholarly interest in understanding how social integration can be maintained in a diverse society. This paper takes a model of the relation between opinion polarization and ethnic segregation as an example for social complexity. Many argue that segregation between different groups in society fosters opinion polarization. Earlier modeling work has supported this theoretically. Here, a simple model is presented that generates the opposite prediction based on the assumption that influence can be assimilative or repulsive, depending on the discrepancy between interacting individuals. It is discussed that these opposite results from similar models point to the need for more empirical research into micro-level assumptions and the micro-to-macro transformation in models of opinion dynamics in a diverse society.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
All computations, simulations and graphics in this paper were produced with Wolfram Mathematica©Version 11.2.
- 2.
Perfect consensus is only obtained in the time limit. The simulation program computed a standard deviation of about \(2.31\; 10^{-9}\) after 100,000 time steps for this run.
- 3.
The probability was about 0.00155.
References
Allport, G.W.: The Nature of Prejudice. Addison-Wesley, Cambridge (1954)
Altafini, C.: Consensus problems on networks with antagonistic interactions. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 58(4), 935–946 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2012.2224251
Baldassarri, D., Bearman, P.: Dynamics of political polarization. Am. Sociol. Rev. 72(5), 784–811 (2007)
Banisch, S., Olbrich, E.: Opinion polarization by learning from social feedback. J. Math. Sociol., (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.2018.1517761
Bianchi, F., Squazzoni, F.: Agent-based models in sociology. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Stat. 7(4), 284–306 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1356
Bramson, A., Grim, P., Singer, D.J., Fisher, S., Berger, W., Sack, G., Flocken, C.: Disambiguation of social polarization concepts and measures. J. Math. Sociol. 40(2), 80–111 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.2016.1147443
Centola, D.: The social origins of networks and diffusion. Am. J. Sociol. 120(5), 1295–1338 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1086/681275
Christ, O., Schmid, K., Lolliot, S., Swart, H., Stolle, D., Tausch, N., Al Ramiah, A., Wagner, U., Vertovec, S., Hewstone, M.: Contextual effect of positive intergroup contact on outgroup prejudice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111(11), 3996–4000 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320901111
Clark, W.A.V., Fossett, M.: Understanding the social context of the Schelling segregation model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105(11), 4109–4114 (2008)
Clemm von Hohenberg, B., Maes, M., Pradelski, B.: Micro influence and macro dynamics of opinion formation (2017). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2974413
Collier, P.: Exodus. Immigration and Multiculturalism in the 21st Century. Penguin, London (2013)
Currarini, S., Jackson, M.O., Pin, P.: Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 107(11), 4857–4861 (2010)
Dandekar, P., Goel, A., Lee, D.T.: Biased assimilation, homophily, and the dynamics of polarization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 110(15), 5791–5796 (2013)
Dovidio, J.F., Love, A., Schellhaas, F.M.H., Hewstone, M.: Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: twenty years of progress and future directions. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 20(5), 606–620 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217712052
Eger, S.: Opinion dynamics and wisdom under out-group discrimination. Math. Soc. Sci. 80, 97–107 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2016.02.005
Ellemers, N., Rink, F.: Diversity in work groups. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 11, 49–53 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.06.001
Feliciani, T., Flache, A., Tolsma, J.: How, when and where can spatial segregation induce opinion polarization? Two competing models. JASSS 20(2), (2017). https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.3419. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/20/2/6.html
Fent, T., Groeber, P., Schweitzer, F.: Coexistence of social norms based on in- and out-group interactions. Adv. Complex Syst. 10, 271–286 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525907000970
Festinger, L.: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1957)
Flache, A., Macy, M.W.: Small worlds and cultural polarization. J. Math. Sociol. 35(1–3), 146–176 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.2010.532261
Flache, A., Mäs, M.: How to get the timing right. A computational model of the effects of the timing of contacts on team cohesion in demographically diverse teams. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 14(1), 23–51 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.2010.532261
Flache, A., Mäs, M., Feliciani, T., Chattoe-Brown, E., Deffuant, G., Huet, S., Lorenz, J.: Models of social influence: towards the next frontiers. JASSS 20(4), (2017). https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.3521. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/20/4/2.html
Heider, F.: Attitudes and cognitive organization. J. Psychol. 21(1), 107–112 (1946)
Hovland, C.I., Harvey, O.J., Sherif, M.: Assimilation and contrast effects in reactions to communication and attitude change. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 55(2), 244–252 (1957). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048480
Huet, S., Deffuant, G.: Openness leads to opinion stability and narrowness to volatility. Adv. Complex Syst. 13(3), 405–423 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525910002633
Jager, W., Amblard, F.: Uniformity, bipolarization and pluriformity captured as generic stylized behavior with an agent-based simulation model of attitude change. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 10(4), 295–303 (2005)
Liu, C.C., Srivastava, S.B.: Pulling closer and moving apart: interaction, identity, and influence in the U.S. Senate, 1973–2009. Am. Sociol. Rev. 80(1), 192–217 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414564182
Macy, M.W., Flache, A.: Social dynamics from the bottom up: agent-based models of social interaction. In: Bearman, P., Hedström, P. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology, pp. 245–268. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)
Macy, M.W., Kitts, J., Flache, A., Benard, S.: Polarization and dynamic networks. a hopfield model of emergent structure. In: Breiger, R., Carley, K., Pattison, P. (eds.) Dynamic Social Network Modeling and Analysis: Workshop Summary and Papers, pp. 162–173. The National Academies Press, Washington (2003)
Mark, N.P.: Culture and competition: homophily and distancing explanations for cultural niches. Am. Sociol. Rev. 68(3), 319–345 (2003)
Mäs, M., Flache, A.: Differentiation without distancing. Explaining bi-polarization of opinions without negative influence. PLoS One 8(11), (2013). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074516
Mäs, M., Flache, A., Kitts, J.A.: Cultural integration and differentiation in groups and organizations (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01952-9_5
Mäs, M., Flache, A., Takács, K., Jehn, K.A.: In the short term we divide, in the long term we unite: demographic crisscrossing and the effects of faultlines on subgroup polarization. Organ. Sci. 24(3), 716–736 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0767
Mason, W.A., Conrey, F.R., Smith, E.R.: Situating social influence processes: dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11(3), 279–300 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307301032
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., Cook, J.M.: Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27(1), 415–444 (2001)
Moody, J.: Race, school integration, and friendship segregation in America. Am. J. Sociol. 107(3), 679–716 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1086/338954
Myers, D.G.: Polarizing effects of social interaction. In: Brandstätter, H., Davis, J.H., Stocker-Kreichgauer, G. (eds.) Group Decision Making, pp. 125–161. Academic Press, London (1982)
Norris, P., Inglehart, R.F.: Muslim integration into western cultures: between origins and destinations. Polit. Stud. 60(2), 228–251 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00951.x
Obama, B.: Farewell address (2017). Retrieved 06 07 2018. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/Farewell
Pettigrew, T.F., Tropp, L.R.: A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 90, 751–783 (2006)
Proskurnikov, A.V., Matveev, A.S., Cao, M.: Opinion dynamics in social networks with hostile camps: consensus versus polarization. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 61(6), 1524–1536 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2015.2471655
Sobkowicz, P.: Modelling opinion formation with physics tools: call for closer link with reality. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 12(1), 11 (2009). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/1/11.html
Stark, T.H., Flache, A., Veenstra, R.: Generalization of positive and negative attitudes toward individuals to outgroup attitudes. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 39(5), 608–622 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213480890
Stark, T.H., Mäs, M., Flache, A.: Liking and disliking minority-group classmates: explaining the mixed findings for the influence of ethnic classroom composition on interethnic attitudes. Soc. Sci. Res. 50, 164–176 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.11.008
Takács, K., Flache, A., Mäs, M.: Discrepancy and disliking do not induce negative opinion shifts. PLoS One 11(6), e0157,948 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157948
Vinokur, A., Burnstein, E.: Depolarization of attitudes in groups. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 36(8), 872–885 (1978)
Acknowledgements
An earlier version of this paper has been presented at the Econophys-2017 & APEC-2017 Conference, held in November 2017 at the Jawaharlal Nehru University and Delhi University, New Delhi, India. The author wishes to thank the participants and especially the organizers of the conference, as well as the editors of this volume, for creating a pleasant and intellectually stimulating environment for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Flache, A. (2019). Social Integration in a Diverse Society: Social Complexity Models of the Link Between Segregation and Opinion Polarization. In: Abergel, F., Chakrabarti, B., Chakraborti, A., Deo, N., Sharma, K. (eds) New Perspectives and Challenges in Econophysics and Sociophysics. New Economic Windows. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11364-3_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11364-3_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11363-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11364-3
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)