Social Simulation Models at the Ethical Crossroads
- 258 Downloads
Computational models of group opinion dynamics are one of the most active fields of sociophysics. In recent years, advances in model complexity and, in particular, the possibility to connect these models with detailed data describing individual behaviors, preferences and activities, have opened the way for the simulations to describe quantitatively selected, real world social systems. The simulations could be then used to study ‘what-if’ scenarios for opinion change campaigns, political, ideological or commercial. The possibility of the practical application of the attitude change models necessitates that the research community working in the field should consider more seriously the moral aspects of their efforts, in particular the potential for their use for unintended goals. The paper discusses these issues, and offers a suggestion for a new research direction: using the attitude models to increase the awareness and detection of social manipulation cases. Such research would offer a scientific challenge and meet the ethical criteria.
KeywordsAgent based models Opinion dynamics Attitude change Big Data Research ethics
The author would like the anonymous Reviewers for their stimulating remarks leading to significant improvements in understanding of the nature of the ethical issues involved in opinion modeling research.
- Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2011). Six provocations for Big Data. In A decade in internet time: Symposium on the dynamics of the internet and society (Vol. 21). Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute.Google Scholar
- Das, S., Lavoie, A., & Magdon-Ismail, M. (2016). Manipulation among the arbiters of collective intelligence: How Wikipedia administrators mold public opinion. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), 10(4), 24.Google Scholar
- Deffuant, G., Amblard, F., Weisbuch, G., & Faure, T. (2002). How can extremism prevail? A study based on the relative agreement interaction model. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(4). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/4/1.html.
- de Lima, T. F. M., Lana, R. M., de Senna Carneiro, T. G., Codeço, C. T., Machado, G. S., Ferreira, L. S., et al. (2016). DengueMe: A tool for the modeling and simulation of dengue spatiotemporal dynamics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(9), 920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fleischmann, K. R., & Wallace, W. A. (2017). Ethical implications of computational modeling. The Bridge, 41(1), 45–51.Google Scholar
- Forelle, M., Howard, P., Monroy-Hernández, A., & Savage, S. (2015). Political bots and the manipulation of public opinion in Venezuela. arXiv preprint arXiv:150707109.
- Galam, S. (2016). The Trump phenomenon, an explanation from sociophysics. arXiv preprint arXiv:160903933.
- Gorwa, R. (2017). Computational propaganda in Poland: False amplifiers and the digital public sphere. Technical report working paper 2017. 2, Project on Computational Propaganda, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
- Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2002). Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(3). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/3/2.html.
- Horbulin, W. P., Dodonow, O. G., & Lande, D. W. (2009). Informacijni operacji ta bezpeka suspilstwa: zagrozy, protidatia modellowanja. Technical report, Institut Problem Nacionalnoi Bezpieki i Oborony Ukraini (National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine).Google Scholar
- Hosni, H., & Vulpiani, A. (2017). Forecasting in light of Big Data. Philosophy & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0265-3.
- Mihaylov, T., Georgiev, G., & Nakov, P. (2015a). Finding opinion manipulation trolls in news community forums. In CoNLL (pp. 310–314).Google Scholar
- Mihaylov, T., Koychev, I., Georgiev, G., & Nakov, P. (2015b). Exposing paid opinion manipulation trolls. In RANLP (pp. 443–450).Google Scholar
- Moran, K. R., Fairchild, G., Generous, N., Hickmann, K., Osthus, D., Priedhorsky, R., et al. (2016). Epidemic forecasting is messier than weather forecasting: The role of human behavior and Internet data streams in epidemic forecast. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 214(Suppl 4), S404–S408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.Google Scholar
- Palmer, E. (2017). Beyond proximity: Consequentialist ethics and system dynamics. Etikk i praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, 11(1), 89–105.Google Scholar
- Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Pruyt, E., & Kwakkel, J. (2007). Combining system dynamics and ethics: Towards more science. In 25th international conference of the system dynamics society, Boston, July 2007.Google Scholar
- Slanina, F., & Lavicka, H. (2003). Analytical results for the Sznajd model of opinion formation. European Physical Journal B-Condensed Matter, 35(2), 279–288.Google Scholar
- Stauffer, D. (2001). Monte Carlo simulations of Sznajd models. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(1). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/1/4.html.
- Stauffer, D., & de Oliveira, P. M. C. (2002). Persistence of opinion in the Sznajd consensus model: Computer simulation. The European Physical Journal B-Condensed Matter, 30(4), 587–592.Google Scholar
- Sunstein, C. R. (2016). Fifty shades of manipulation. Journal of Marketing Behavior, 1(3–4), 213–244.Google Scholar
- Tufekci, Z. (2014). Engineering the public: Big Data, surveillance and computational politics. First Monday, 19(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i7.4901.
- Weisbuch, G., Deffuant, G., Amblard, F., & Nadal, J. P. (2003). Interacting agents and continuous opinions dynamics. In R. Cowan & N. Jonard (Eds.), Heterogenous agents, interactions and economic performance. Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems (Vol. 521, pp. 225–242). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wragg, T. (2006). Modelling the effects of information campaigns using agent-based simulation. http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/4498/DSTO-TR-1853.pdf.
- Zhang, M., Verbraeck, A., Meng, R., Chen, B., & Qiu, X. (2016). Modeling spatial contacts for epidemic prediction in a large-scale artificial city. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 19(4). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/19/4/3.html.