Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Complex Networks and their Applications

COMPLEX NETWORKS 2018: Complex Networks and Their Applications VII pp 287–299Cite as

Procedural Influence on Consensus Formation in Social Networks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

  • 2503 Accesses

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 813))

Abstract

How do the rules of interaction influence consensus formation in a social network? In this paper, I analyse procedural influence – a construct that is well-established within the group decision-making research tradition – in the context of networked consensus formation. I argue that interaction procedures regulate the flow of social influence among actors, which, in turn, potentially affects collective outcomes. Based on this, I explain how procedural influence can be integrated into a formal model of social influence. I then utilise an agent-based simulation (ABS) to quantify the effects of three exemplary interaction rules on the formation of consensus in a social network. My findings indicate that applying these rules to regulate interactions has mixed effects on the overall consensus outcomes, but consistently negative effects on the efficiency of consensus formation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Acemoglu, D., Ozdaglar, A.: Opinion dynamics and learning in social networks. Dyn. Games Appl. 1(1), 3–49 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Cialdini, R., Goldstein, N.: Social influence: compliance and conformity. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 55, 591–621 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Davis, J.: Some compelling intuitions about group consensus decisions, theoretical and empirical research, and interpersonal aggregation phenomena: selected examples, 1950 - 1990. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. 52(1), 3–38 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Davis, J., Hulbert, L., Au, W.: Procedural influence on group decision making: the case of straw polls – observation and simulation. In: Hirokawa, R., Poole, M. (eds.) Communication and Group Decision Making, pp. 384–425. Sage, London (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Davis, J., Kameda, T., Parks, C., Stasson, M., Zimmerman, Z.: Some social mechanics of group decision making: the distribution of opinion, polling sequence, and implications for consensus. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59(6), 1000–1012 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Davis, J., Stasson, M., Ono, K., Zimmerman, Z.: Effects of straw polls on group decision making: sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 55(6), 918–926 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Davis, J., Tindale, R., Naggao, D., Hinsz, V., Robertson, B.: Order effects in multiple decisions by groups: a demonstration with mock juries and trial procedures. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 47(5), 1003–1012 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Endriss, U., Grandi, U., Porello, D.: Complexity of judgment aggregation. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 45, 481–514 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Friedkin, N.: A Structural Theory of Social Influence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Friedkin, N., Jia, P., Bullo, F.: A theory of the evolution of social power: natural trajectories of interpersonal influence systems along issue sequences. Sociol. Sci. 3, 444–472 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friedkin, N., Johnsen, E.: Social influence and opinions. J. Math. Sociol. 15(3–4), 193–206 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Friedkin, N., Johnsen, E.: Social influence networks and opinion change. Adv. Group Process 16, 1–29 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Friedkin, N., Proskurnikov, A., Tempo, R., Parsegov, S.: Network science on belief system dynamics under logic constraints. Science 354(6310), 321–326 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Grandi, U.: Social choice and social networks. In: Endriss, U. (ed.) Trends in Computational Social Choice, pp. 169–184. AI Access (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Greenberg, J., Williams, K., O’Brien, M.: Considering the harshest verdict first: biasing effects on mock juror verdicts. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 12(1), 45–50 (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jia, P., MirTabatabaei, A., Friedkin, N., Bullo, F.: Opinion dynamics and the evolution of social power in influence networks. SIAM Rev 57(3), 367–397 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Kameda, T.: Procedural influence in consensus formation: evaluating group decision making from a social choice perspective. In: Witte, E., Davis, J. (eds.) Understanding Group Behavior: Consensual Action by Small Groups, pp. 137–161. Lawrence Erlbaum, New York (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kameda, T., Sugimori, S.: Procedural influence in two-step group decision making: power of local majorities in consensus formation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69(5), 865–876 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kerr, N., Tindale, R.: Group performance and decision making. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 55, 623–655 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Klein, D., Marx, J., Fischbach, K.: Agent-based modeling in social science, history, and philosophy: an introduction. Hist. Soc. Res. 43(1), 7–27 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Levine, J., Moreland, R.: Progress in small group research. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 41, 585–634 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lorenz, J.: Continuous opinion dynamics of multidimensional allocation problems under bounded confidence: more dimensions lead to better chances for consensus. EJESS 19(2), 213–227 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marino, S., Hogue, I., Ray, C., Kirschner, D.: A methodology for performing global uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in systems biology. J. Theor. Biol. 254(1), 178–196 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Mason, W., Conrey, F., Smith, E.: Situating social influence processes: dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11(3), 279–300 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McGrath, J., Arrow, H., Berdahl, J.: The study of groups: past, present, and future. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 4(1), 95–105 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McKay, M., Beckman, R., Conover, W.: A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 21(2), 239–245 (1979)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Newman, M.: Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103(23), 8577–8582 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Page, S.: Agent-based models. In: Ltd, M.P. (ed.) The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, pp. 107–113. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2018)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Parsegov, S., Proskurnikov, A., Tempo, R., Friedkin, N.: Novel multidimensional models of opinion dynamics in social networks. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 62(5), 2270–2285 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Saltelli, A., Marivoet, J.: Non-parametric statistics in sensitivity analysis for model output: a comparison of selected techniques. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe. 28(2), 229–253 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stasser, G., Davis, J.: Group decision making and social influence: a social interaction sequence model. Psychol. Rev. 88(6), 523–551 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thiele, J., Kurth, W., Grimm, V.: Facilitating parameter estimation and sensitivity analysis of agent-based models: a cookbook using netlogo and R. JASSS 17(3), 2 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Thompson, L., Mannix, E., Bazerman, M.: Group negotiation: effects of decision rule, agenda, and aspiration. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54(1), 86–95 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tindale, R., Kameda, T., Hinsz, V.: Group decision making. In: Hogg, M., Cooper, J. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 381–403. Sage, London (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Uzzi, B., Amaral, L., Reed-Tsochas, F.: Small-World networks and management science research: a review. Eur. Manag. Rev. 4(2), 77–91 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Watts, D., Strogatz, S.: Collective dynamics of “small-World” networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wilensky, U.: NetLogo. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston (1999). http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/

  38. Xia, H., Wang, H., Xuan, Z.: Opinion dynamics: a multidisciplinary review and perspective on future research. Int. J. Knowl. Syst. Sci. 2(4), 72–91 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Xiong, F., Liu, Y., Wang, L., Wang, X.: Analysis and application of opinion model with multiple topic interactions. Chaos 27(8) (2017)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Systems and Social Networks, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany

    Kathrin Eismann

Authors
  1. Kathrin Eismann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin Eismann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nokia Bell Labs, Cambridge, UK

    Luca Maria Aiello

  2. IUT Lumière, University of Lyon, Bron Cedex, France

    Chantal Cherifi

  3. LE2I UMR CNRS 6306 9, University of Burgundy, Dijon Cedex, France

    Hocine Cherifi

  4. Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Renaud Lambiotte

  5. Department of Computer Science and Technology, The Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Pietro Lió

  6. Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research, School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Luis M. Rocha

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Eismann, K. (2019). Procedural Influence on Consensus Formation in Social Networks. In: Aiello, L., Cherifi, C., Cherifi, H., Lambiotte, R., Lió, P., Rocha, L. (eds) Complex Networks and Their Applications VII. COMPLEX NETWORKS 2018. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 813. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05414-4_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation