Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305, USA.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Apr 9;110(15):5791-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1217220110. Epub 2013 Mar 27.
We study the issue of polarization in society through a model of opinion formation. We say an opinion formation process is polarizing if it results in increased divergence of opinions. Empirical studies have shown that homophily, i.e., greater interaction between like-minded individuals, results in polarization. However, we show that DeGroot's well-known model of opinion formation based on repeated averaging can never be polarizing, even if individuals are arbitrarily homophilous. We generalize DeGroot's model to account for a phenomenon well known in social psychology as biased assimilation: When presented with mixed or inconclusive evidence on a complex issue, individuals draw undue support for their initial position, thereby arriving at a more extreme opinion. We show that in a simple model of homophilous networks, our biased opinion formation process results in polarization if individuals are sufficiently biased. In other words, homophily alone, without biased assimilation, is not sufficient to polarize society. Quite interestingly, biased assimilation also provides a framework to analyze the polarizing effect of Internet-based recommender systems that show us personalized content.
我们通过一个意见形成模型来研究社会中的极化问题。我们说,如果一个意见形成过程导致意见分歧的增加,那么这个过程就是极化的。实证研究表明,相似性,即志同道合的人之间更多的互动,会导致极化。然而,我们表明,基于重复平均的 DeGroot 著名的意见形成模型永远不会是极化的,即使个体是任意相似的。我们将 DeGroot 的模型推广到社会心理学中一个众所周知的现象,即偏见同化:当面对复杂问题上的混合或不确定的证据时,个体对他们最初的立场给予不适当的支持,从而形成更极端的观点。我们表明,在一个相似的网络的简单模型中,如果个体有足够的偏见,我们有偏见的意见形成过程会导致极化。换句话说,仅仅是相似性本身,而没有偏见同化,不足以使社会极化。有趣的是,偏见同化也为分析基于互联网的推荐系统的极化效应提供了一个框架,这些系统向我们展示个性化的内容。