Skip to main content

How Are Physical and Social Spaces Related? — Cognitive Agents as the Necessary “Glue”

  • Chapter
Agent-Based Computational Modelling

Part of the book series: Contributions to Economics ((CE))

Summary

The paper argues that in many (if not most) cases, explicitly representing aspects of both physical and social space will be necessary in order to capture the outcomes of observed social processes (including those of spatial distribution). The connection between social and physical spaces for an actor will, almost inevitably involve some aspect of cognition. Thus, unless there is evidence to the contrary it is unsafe to try and represent such social distribution without representing key aspects of cognition linking social and spatial topologies. This argument is demonstrated by two counter-examples: an abstract simulation extending Schelling’s cellular automata model of racial segregation to include the social communication of fear; and a more descriptive simulation of social influence and domestic water consumption. Both models are sufficiently credible that one could not rule similar processes as occurring in reality, but in both the social and physical spaces that the agents are embedded in is critical to the global outcomes.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Axtel, R. and Epstein, J. M. (1996) Artificial Societies-social science from the bottom up. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barthélémy, O. (2003) The impact of the model structure in social simulations. 1st International Conference of the European Social Simulation Association (ESSA 2003), Gronigen, the Netherlands, September 2003. (http://cfpm.org/cpmrep121.html).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Carley, K. (2003) Dynamic Network Theory. In: Breiger, R., Carley, K. and Pattison, P. (eds.) Dynamic Social Network Modelling and Analysis: Workshop Summary and Papers. Washington: The National Academies Press, 133–145.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Downing, T.E, Butterfield, R.E., Edmonds, B., Knox, J.W., Moss, S., Piper, B.S. and Weatherhead, E.K. (and the CCDeW project team) (2003) Climate Change and the Demand for Water, Research Report, Stockholm Environment Institute Oxford Office, Oxford. (http://www.sei.se/oxford/ccdew/).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Edmonds, B. (1999) Capturing Social Embeddedness: a Constructivist Approach. Adaptive Behaviour 7:323–348.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edmonds, B. and Moss, S. (2005) From KISS to KIDS an “anti-simplistic” modelling approach. In: P. Davidsson et al. (Eds.): Multi Agent Based Simulation 2004. Springer, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 3415:130–144.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Edmonds, B. and Hales, D. (2005) Computational Simulation as Theoretical Experiment, Journal of Mathematical Sociology 29:209–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Edmonds, B. Barthelemy, O. and Moss, S. (2002) Domestic Water Demand and Social Influence-an agent-based modelling approach, CPM Report 02-103, MMU, 2002 (http://cfpm.org/cpmrep103.html).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Granovetter, M. (1985) Economic-Action and Social-Structure-The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal Of Sociology 91:481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Moss, S. and Edmonds, B. (2005) Sociology and Simulation:-Statistical and Qualitative Cross-Validation. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4) 1095–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Polhill, J.G., Gotts, N.M. and Law, A.N.R. (2001) Imitative Versus Non-Imitative Strategies in a Land Use Simulation. Cybernetics and Systems 32:285–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schelling, T. (1969) Models of Segregation. American Economic Review 59:488–493.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sudman, S. (1988) Experiments in Measuring Neighbor and Relative Social Networks. Social Networks 10:93–108.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Watts, D. J. (1999) Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wellman, B. (1996) Are personal communities local? A Dumptarian reconsideration. Social Networks 18:347–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Edmonds, B. (2006). How Are Physical and Social Spaces Related? — Cognitive Agents as the Necessary “Glue”. In: Billari, F.C., Fent, T., Prskawetz, A., Scheffran, J. (eds) Agent-Based Computational Modelling. Contributions to Economics. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-7908-1721-X_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics