Group Polarization: Connecting, Influence and Balance, a Simulation Study Based on Hopfield Modeling

  • Zhenpeng Li
  • Xijin Tang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7458)


In this paper, we address the general question of how negative social influence determines global voting patterns for a group-based population, when individuals face binary decisions. The intrinsic relation between global patterns and local structure motifs distribution is investigated based on Hopfield model. By simulating results with the model, we examine the group opinions polarization processes, and find that the global pattern of group opinions polarization is closely linked with local level structure balance. This computing result is well agreed with the classic structure balance theory of social psychology.


global polarization structure balance Hopfield model social influence 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Raafat, R.M., Chater, N., Frith, C.: Herding in humans. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13, 420–428 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mannes, A.E.: Are we wise about the wisdom of crowds? the use of group judgments in belief revision. Management Science 55(8), 1267–1279 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., Welch, I.: Learning from the Behavior of others: Conformity, Fads, and Informational Cascades. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12, 151–170 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.: Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature 393(6684), 440–442 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heider, F.: Attitudes and Cognitive Organization. Journal of Psychology 21, 107–112 (1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cartwright, D., Harary, F.: Structural balance: A generalization of Heider’s theory. Psychological Review 63, 277–292 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Asch, S.E.: Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgment. In: Guetzkow, H. (ed.) Groups, Leadership and Men. Carnegie Press, Pittsburgh (1951)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dunia, L.P., Watts, D.J.: Social Influence, Binary Decisions and Collective Dynamics. Rationality and Society 20, 399–443 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rane, H., Sumra, S.: Social media, social movements and the diffusion of ideas in the Arab uprisings. Journal of International Communication 18(1), 97–111 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Axelrod, R.: The dissemination of culture: A model with local convergence and global polarization. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(2), 203–226 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Castellano, C., Vilone, D., Vespignani, A.: Incomplete Ordering of the voter model on Small-World Networks. EuroPhysics Letters 63(1), 153–158 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tajfel, H.: Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Galam, S.: Fragmentation versus stability in bimodal coalitions. Physica A 230, 174–188 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leskovec, J., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J.: Predicting Positive and Negative Links in Online Social Networks. In: ACM WWW International Conference on World Wide Web (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holland, P.W., Leinhardt, S.: A method for detecting structure in sociometric data. American Journal of Sociology 70, 492–513 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.: Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature 393(6684), 440–442 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Macy, M.W., Kitts, J.A., Flache, A.: Polarization in 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 DC (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Butts, C.T.: Social Network Analysis with sna. Journal of Statistical Software 24(6), 1–51 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li, Z., Tang, X.: Group Polarization and Non-positive Social Influence: A Revised Voter Model Study. In: Hu, B., Liu, J., Chen, L., Zhong, N. (eds.) BI 2011. LNCS, vol. 6889, pp. 295–303. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhenpeng Li
    • 1
  • Xijin Tang
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Systems ScienceAcademy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingP.R. China

Personalised recommendations