Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Opinion Formation Models

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Quantitative Sociodynamics

  • 1834 Accesses

Abstract

Since the expression of an opinion represents a behaviour, the change of (expressed) opinions is a suitable example for behavioural changes, particularly because, by means of opinion polls, a direct comparison with empirical data is possible (cf. Chap. 13). The laws of opinion formation have already long been the topic of social research. For example, Osgood and Tannenbaum with their congruity principle [213], Heider with his balance theory [119,120], and Festinger with his dissonance theory [74] (cf. Fig. 8.1) developed formal models which deal with the stability of attitudes and with the probability of certain attitude changes. An overview of the state of related research is given in [77,220].

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

Access this chapter

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and 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
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In the work of Weidlich and Haag this quantity is denoted as preference. However, in order to distinguish \(\delta_a(x,t)\) from \(U_\alpha(x|y;t)\) the author decided to introduce another term.

References

  1. Aguda BD, Larter R, Clarke BL (1989) Dynamic elements of mixed-mode oscillations and chaos in a peroxidase-oxidase model network. J Chem Phys 90(8):4168–4175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartholomew DJ (1967) Stochastic models for social processes. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  3. Christaller W (1980) Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, p 71

    Google Scholar 

  4. Czerwon H-J, Der R, Haberlandt R (1977) Quantum statistical theory of chemical reactions. I. General formulation and lowest-order results. Mol Phys 33(6):1743–1756

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Diekmann A (1992) The log-logistic distribution as a model for social diffusion processes. J Sci Ind Res 51:285–290

    Google Scholar 

  6. Erdmann G, Fritsch B (Jul 1985) Synergismen in Parteiensystemen. Arbeitspapiere. Institut für Wirschaftsforschung, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  7. Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Row & Peterson, Evanston, IL

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  9. Geest T, Olsen LF, Steinmetz CG, Larter R, Schaffer WM (1993) Nonlinear analyses of periodic and chaotic time series from the peroxidase-oxidase reaction. J Phys Chem 97: 8431–8441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Granovetter M, Soong R (1983) Threshold models of diffusion and collective behavior. J Math Sociol 9:165–179

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Haag G (1989) Dynamic decision theory: applications to urban and regional topics. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Hamblin RL, Jacobsen RB, Miller JLL (1973) A mathematical theory of social change. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hao B-L, Wang G-R, Zhang S-Y (1983) U-sequences in the periodically forced Brusselator. Commun Theor Phys 2(3):1075–1080

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Hao B-L, Zhang S-Y (1982) Hierarchy of chaotic bands. J Stat Phys 28(4):769–792

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Haus JW, Kehr KW (1987) Diffusion in regular and disordered lattices. Phys Rep 150(5, 6): 263–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Heider F (1946) Attitudes and cognitive organization. J Psychol 21:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Heider F (1958) The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Hilfer R (1986) Renormierungsansätze in der Theorie ungeordneter Systeme. Harri Deutsch, Frankfurt/Main

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hohenberg PC, Halperin BI (1977) Theory of dynamic critical phenomena. Rev Mod Phys 49(3):435–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Keener JP, Tyson JJ (1986) Spiral waves in the Belousov-Zhabotinskii reaction. Physica D 21:307–324

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Kennedy AM (1983) The adoption and diffusion of new industrial products: a literature review. Eur J Mark 17(3):31–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahajan V, Peterson RA (1985) Models for innovation diffusion. Sage, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. May RM (1973) Stability and complexity in model ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp 50–53, 193–194

    Google Scholar 

  24. Munz M, Weidlich W (1990) Settlement formation. Part II: Numerical simulation. Ann Reg Sci 24:177–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Osgood CE, Tannenbaum PH (1955) The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychol Rev 62:42–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT (1986) Communication and persuasion. Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  27. Puu T (1989) Nonlinear economic dynamics, Chap. 3: Population dynamics. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Reiner R (1988) Interregionale migration. PhD thesis, University of Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schaffer WM, Olsen LF, Truty GL, Fulmer SL, Graser DJ (1988) Periodic and chaotic dynamics in childhood infections. In: Markus M, Müller StC, Nicolis G (eds) From chemical to biological organization. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schweitzer F, Bartels J, Pohlmann L (1991) Simulation of opinion structures in social systems. In: Ebeling W, Peschel M, Weidlich W (eds) Models of selforganization in complex systems (MOSES). Akademie, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  31. Scott SK (1991) Chemical chaos. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  32. Troitzsch KG (1989) Mikromodellierung der Bildung politischer Einstellungen in interagierenden Populationen. In: Falter JW, Rattinger H, Troitzsch KG (eds) Wahlen und politische Einstellungen. Lang, Frankfurt/Main

    Google Scholar 

  33. Weidlich W (1971) The statistical description of polarization phenomena in society. Br J Math Stat Psychol 24:51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Weidlich W (1972) The use of statistical models in sociology. Collective Phenomena 1:51–59

    Google Scholar 

  35. Weidlich W (1987) Quantitative social science. Physica Scripta 35:380–387

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Weidlich W (1991) Physics and social science—the approach of synergetics. Phys Rep 204:1–163

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Weidlich W (1994) Synergetic modelling concepts for sociodynamics with application to collective political opinion formation. J Math Sociol 18:267–291

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Weidlich W, Haag G (1983) Concepts and models of a quantitative sociology. The dynamics of interacting populations. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Weidlich W, Haag G (1987) A dynamic phase transition model for spatial agglomeration processes. J Reg Sci 27(4):529–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Weidlich W, Haag G (eds) (1988) Interregional migration. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  41. Weidlich W, Munz M (1990) Settlement formation. Part I: A dynamic theory. Ann Reg Sci 24:83–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ETH Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, CLU E 1, Clausiusstrasse 50, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Prof. Dr. Dirk Helbing (Chair of Sociology, in particular of Modeling and Simulation)

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. Dirk Helbing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dirk Helbing .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Helbing, D. (2010). Opinion Formation Models. In: Quantitative Sociodynamics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11546-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation