Abstract
Experimental and field research has demonstrated a pervasive tendency toward pairwise conformity among individuals connected by positive social ties, and work using formal models has shown that opinions on connected influence networks should thus converge toward uniformity. Observing that diversity persists even in small scale groups and organizations, we investigate two empirically grounded mechanisms of social differentiation that may account for this persistence: First, actors may dislike or disrespect peers who diverge too much from their own views, and may change their opinions or behaviors to distance themselves further from those negative referents. Second, when surrounded by similar others, actors may try to maintain a sufficient sense of uniqueness by exploring new opinions or behaviors. Using computational experiments, we demonstrate that these two mechanisms lead to different patterns of polarization, radicalization, and factionalism and also investigate the conditions under which integration occurs. In closing, we discuss the implications for cultural dynamics in organizations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Digital computers may fail to distinguish very small numbers from zero (Izquierdo and Polhill 2006), an error that would be consequential here in that it would erase the distinction between weak influence and no influence. To avoid such problems with floating point inaccuracy, we assign a minimum on positive weights at 10−5 and assign a maximum on negative weights at \(-1{0}^{-5}\). We thus conservatively ensure that weak ties are not mistakenly treated as null ties by the computer.
- 2.
It is commonly believed that positive influence models invariably produce consensus on connected networks. Even as we add that the network must be strongly connected (i.e. paths allow influence to flow in both directions for all dyads in the population), this may not be strictly true in discrete time for certain network structures if the influence weight is high enough. The lack of convergence is obvious if influence weights (w ij, t ) are allowed to exceed 1. 0, of course, but even w ij, t = 1 will yield stable limit cycles that prevent convergence for certain network structures. See Kitts and Trowbridge (2007) for an explanation of the general problem. This is not a danger here because influence weights in our model are strictly determined by similarity; that is, if w ij, t = 1 then the agents’ opinions are already identical and no influence is possible. Thus stable limit cycles cannot prevent convergence.
- 3.
We show below that the model may in this condition generate multiplex equilibria, where two extreme factions are accompanied by moderate subgroups. While interesting, these outcomes are very rare and vanish in the presence of noise.
References
Abelson, R. P.: Mathematical Models of the Distribution of Attitudes Under Controversy. In: Frederiksen, N., Gulliksen, H. (eds.) Contributions to Mathematical Psychology, 142–160. Rinehart Winston, New York (1964)
Aronson, E.: The social animal. Freeman Press, San Francisco (1994)
Axelrod, R.: The dissemination of culture - A model with local convergence and global polarization. J Conflict Res. 41, 203–226 (1997)
Baldassarri, D., Bearman, P.: Dynamics of political polarization. Am Sociol Rev. 72, 784–811 (2007)
Bednar, J., A., Bramson, A., Jones-Rooy, A.,Page, S.: Emergent Cultural Signatures and Persistent Diversity: A Model of Conformity and Consistency. Ration Soc. 22, 407–444 (2010)
Berger, R. L.: A Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Reaching a Consensus Using DeGroot’s Method. J Am Stat Assoc. 76, 415–418 (1981)
Berscheid, E.: Opinion Change and Communicator-Communicatee Similarity and Dissimilarity. J Pers Soc Psychol. 4, 670–680 (1966)
Brewer, M. B.: The Social Self - on Being the Same and Different at the Same Time. Pers Soc Psychol B. 17, 475–482 (1991)
Bourdieu, P.: Distinction: A social critique of the Judgment of Taste. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1984[1979])
Carley, K.: A Theory of Group Stability. Am Sociol Rev. 56, 331–354 (1991)
Carroll, G. R., J. R. Harrison.: Come together? The Organizational Dynamics of Post-Merger Cultural Integration. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 10, 349–368 (2002)
Centola, D., Gonzalez-Avella, J. C., Eguiluz, V. M.,Miguel, M. S.: Homophily, cultural drift and the co-evolution of cultural groups. J Conflict Res. 51, 905–929 (2007)
Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F.,Weisbuch, G.: Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Advances in Complex Systems. 3, 87–98 (2000)
DeGroot, M. H.: Reaching a Consensus. J Am Stat Assoc. 69, 118–121 (1974)
De Sanctis, L., Galla, T.: Effects of noise and confidence thresholds in nominal and metric Axelrod dynamics of social influence. Phys Rev E. 79, 046108 (2009)
Durkheim, E.: The Division of Labor in Society. The Free Press, New York (1997 [1893])
Durrett, R., Levin, S. A.: Can Stable Social Groups be Maintained by Homophilous Imitation alone? J Econ Behav Organ. 57, 267–286 (2005)
Elias, N.: The Civilizing Process, Vol.I. The History of Manners. Blackwell, Oxford (1969[1939])
Festinger, L.: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Row, Petersen and Company, Evanston, White Plains (1957)
Festinger, L., Schachter, S., Back, K.: Social Pressures in Informal Groups. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA (1950)
Flache, A., Macy, M.: Local Convergence and Global Diversity: From Interpersonal to Social Influence. J Conflict Res. 55, 970–995 (2011)
Flache, A., Mäs, M.: How to get the timing right? A computational model of how demographic faultlines undermine team performance and how the right timing of contacts can solve the problem. Comput Math Organ Theory. 14, 23–51 (2008)
French, J. R. P.: A Formal Theory of Social Power. Psychol Rev. 63, 181–194 (1956)
Friedkin, N. E., Johnsen, E. C.: Social-Influence and Opinions. J Math Sociol. 15, 193–205 (1990)
Harary, F.: A criterion for unanimity in French’s theory of social power. In: Cartwright, D. (eds.) Studies in social power, 168–182. Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor (1959)
Harrison, J. R., Carroll, G.: The Dynamics of Cultural Influence Networks. Comput Math Organ Theory. 8, 5–30 (2002)
Harrison, J. R., Carroll, G. R.: Culture and Demography in Organizations. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. (2006)
Hegselmann, R., Krause, U.: Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis, and Simulation. JASSS-J ARTIF SOC S. 5, (2002)
Heider, F.: Attitudes and Cognitive Organization. In: Fishbein, M. (eds.) Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, 39–41. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, London, Sydney (1967)
Homans, G. C.: The Human Group. Harcourt, Brace, and World, New York (1950)
Imhoff, R., Erb, H. P.: What Motivates Nonconformity? Uniqueness Seeking Blocks Majority Influence. Pers Soc Psychol B. 35, 309–320 (2009)
Izquierdo, L. R., Polhill, J. G.: Is Your Model Susceptible to Floating-Point Errors? JASSS-J ARTIF SOC S. 9 (2006)
Jehn, K. A.: A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict. Admin Sci Quart. 40, 256–282 (1995)
Jehn, K. A.: A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions of Organizational Groups. Admin Sci Quart. 42, 530–557 (1997)
Jehn, K. A., Bendersky, C.: Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Res Organ Behav. 25, 187–242 (2003)
Kitts, J. A.: Mobilizing in Black Boxes: Social Networks and Participation in Social Movement Organizations. Mobilization. 5, 241–257 (2000)
Kitts, J.: Social Influence and the Emergence of Norms Amid Ties of Amity and Enmity. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory. 14, 407–422 (2006)
Kitts, J. A., Trowbridge, P. T.: Shape Up Or Ship Out: Social Networks, Social Influence, and Organizational Demography. Comput Math Organ Theory. 13, 333–353 (2007)
Klemm, K., Eguiluz, V. M., Toral, R.,Miguel, M. S.: Global culture: A noise-induced transition in finite systems. Phys Rev E. 67, 045101(R) (2003)
Lehrer, K.: Social Consensus and rational agnoiology. Synthese. 31, 141–160 (1975)
Latane, B.: The Psychology of Social Impact. Am Psychol. 36, 343–356 (1981)
Latane, B.: Pressures to uniformity and the evolution of cultural norms. In: Ilgen, D. R., Hulin, C. L. (eds.) Computational Modeling of Behavior in Organizations: The Third Scientific Discipline, 189–215. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (2000)
Macy, M. W., Kitts, J., Flache, A.,Benard, S.: Polarization and 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, 162–173. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2003)
Mark, N. P.: Beyond individual differences: Social differentiation from first principles. Am Sociol Rev. 63, 309–330 (1998)
Mark, N. P.: Culture and Competition: Homophily and Distancing Explanations for Cultural Niches. Am Sociol Rev. 68, 319–345 (2003)
Mäs, M., Flache, A.,Helbing, D.: Individualization as Driving Force of Clustering Phenomena in Humans. PLoS Computational Biology. 6, e1000959 (2010)
Parisi, D., Cecconi, F.: Cultural Change in Spatial Environments. J Conflict Res. 47, 163–179 (2003)
Pineda, M., Toral, R.,Hernandez-Garc?a, E.: Noisy continuous-opinion dynamics. Journal of Statistical Mechanics. P08001 (2009)
Sampson, E. E., Insko, C. A.: Cognitive consistency and performance in the autokinetic situation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 68, 184–192 (1964)
Schwartz, S. H., Ames, R. E.: Positive and Negative Referent Others as Sources of Influence: A Case of Helping. Sociometry. 40, 12–21 (1977)
Shibanai, Y., Yasuno, S.,Ishiguro, I.: Effects of Global Information Feedback Diversity. J Conflict Res. 45, 80–96 (2001)
Snyder, C. R., Fromkin, H. L.: Uniqueness. The human Pursuit of Difference. Plenum Press, New York and London (1980)
Tajfel, H., Turner, J. C.: The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In: Worchel, S., Austin, W. G. (eds.) Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 7–24. Nelson-Hall Publishers, Chicago (1986)
Acknowledgements
The research of Andreas Flache and Michael Mäs has been supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, NWO (VIDI Grant 452-04-351). James Kitts acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (BCS-0433086 and IIS-0433637).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mäs, M., Flache, A., Kitts, J.A. (2014). Cultural Integration and Differentiation in Groups and Organizations. In: Dignum, V., Dignum, F. (eds) Perspectives on Culture and Agent-based Simulations. Studies in the Philosophy of Sociality, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01952-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01952-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-01951-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-01952-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)