Using Agent Based Modelling to Integrate Data on Attitude Change

This article has two goals. Firstly, it shows how a relatively novel technique (Agent Based Modelling, hereafter ABM) can integrate different data types that are often used only in separate strands of research (interviews, experiments and surveys). It does this by comparing a well-known ABM of attitude dynamics with an alternative model using data from surveys and experiments. Secondly, the article explains ABM methodology and why it is important to the distinctiveness of ABM as a research method. In particular, the ramifications of differing approaches to ABM calibration and validation are discussed using the two different ABM as examples. The article concludes by showing how ABM might provide a progressive research strategy for integrating different data types and thus different disciplines in attitude research.

[1]  Joshua M. Epstein,et al.  Generative Social Science: Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling (Princeton Studies in Complexity) , 2007 .

[2]  D. Goldsmith.  Einstein's Greatest Blunder?: The Cosmological Constant and Other Fudge Factors in the Physics of the Universe , 1997 .

[3]  W. Wood.  Attitude change: persuasion and social influence. , 2000, Annual review of psychology.

[4]  Gary McKeown,et al.  Mass Media and Polarisation Processes in the Bounded Confidence Model of Opinion Dynamics , 2006, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[5]  P. Egan,et al.  Turning Personal Experience into Political Attitudes: The Effect of Local Weather on Americans’ Perceptions about Global Warming , 2012 .

[6]  ARTHUR ST. GEORGE,et al.  THE MASS MEDIA, POLITICAL ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIOR , 1983 .

[7]  Guillaume Deffuant,et al.  Comparing Extremism Propagation Patterns in Continuous Opinion Models , 2006, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[8]  Erez Hatna,et al.  The Schelling Model of Ethnic Residential Dynamics: Beyond the Integrated - Segregated Dichotomy of Patterns , 2012, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[9]  Scott Moss,et al.  Alternative Approaches to the Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models , 2007, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[10]  Christian Schulze,et al.  Discretized Opinion Dynamics of the Deffuant Model on Scale-Free Networks , 2004, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[11]  A. Siraj.  The construction of the homosexual ‘other’ by British Muslim heterosexuals , 2009 .

[12]  J. Fleishman,et al.  Types of Political Attitude Structure: Results of a Cluster Analysis , 1986 .

[13]  O. J. Harvey,et al.  Assimilation and contrast effects in reactions to communication and attitude change. , 1957, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[14]  Dirk Jacobmeier.  FOCUSING OF OPINIONS IN THE DEFFUANT MODEL: FIRST IMPRESSION COUNTS , 2006 .

[15]  J. Durant,et al.  The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain , 1995 .

[16]  R. Huckfeldt,et al.  Political Disagreement: The Survival of Diverse Opinions within Communication Networks , 2004 .

[17]  Krzysztof Kulakowski,et al.  Zaller-Deffuant Model of Mass Opinion , 2009, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[18]  Thomas C. Schelling,et al.  Dynamic models of segregation , 1971 .

[19]  Steven Skiena.  Calculated Bets: Computers, Gambling, and Mathematical Modeling to Win , 2001 .

[20]  D. Bertaux,et al.  Pathways to Social Class: A Qualitative Approach to Social Mobility , 1997 .

[21]  K. O'Lessker.  Who Voted for Hitler? A New Look at the Class Basis of Naziism , 1968, American Journal of Sociology.

[22]  C. Teddlie,et al.  SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research , 2010 .

[23]  Dhananjay K. Gode,et al.  Allocative Efficiency of Markets with Zero-Intelligence Traders: Market as a Partial Substitute for Individual Rationality , 1993, Journal of Political Economy.

[24]  S. Mullainathan,et al.  Sticking with Your Vote: Cognitive Dissonance and Political Attitudes , 2009 .

[25]  John N. Warfield,et al.  World dynamics , 1973 .