4.1 Article

THE EFFECT OF IN-GROUP FAVORITISM ON THE COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR OF INDIVIDUALS' OPINIONS

Journal

ADVANCES IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS
Volume 18, Issue 1-2, Pages -

Publisher

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0219525915500022

Keywords

Opinion dynamics; in-group favoritism; homophily; radicalization; extremism

Funding

  1. Center for Social Complexity
  2. Department of Computational Social Science at George Mason University
  3. GMU Presidential Fellowship
  4. ONR-Minerva [N00014130054]
  5. S National Science Foundation
  6. Computational Social Science Society of the Americas (CSSSA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Empirical findings from social psychology show that sometimes people show favoritism toward in-group members in order to reach a global consensus, even against individuals' own preferences (e.g., altruistically or deontically). Here we integrate ideas and findings on in-group favoritism, opinion dynamics, and radicalization using an agent-based model entitled cooperative bounded confidence (CBC). We investigate the interplay of homophily, rejection, and in-group cooperation drivers on the formation of opinion clusters and the emergence of extremist, radical opinions. Our model is the first to explicitly explore the effect of in-group favoritism on the macro-level, collective behavior of opinions. We compare our model against the two-dimentional bounded confidence model with rejection mechanism, proposed by Huet et al. [Adv. Complex Syst. 13(3) (2010) 405423], and find that the number of opinion clusters and extremists is reduced in our model. Moreover, results show that group influence can never dominate homophilous and rejecting encounters in the process of opinion cluster formation. We conclude by discussing implications of our model for research on collective behavior of opinions emerging from individuals' interaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available