Social network structure and the achievement of consensus

It is widely believed that bringing parties with differing opinions together to discuss their differences will help both in securing consensus and also in ensuring that this consensus closely approximates the truth. This paper investigates this presumption using two mathematical and computer simulation models. Ultimately, these models show that increased contact can be useful in securing both consensus and truth, but it is not always beneficial in this way. This suggests one should not, without qualification, support policies which increase interpersonal contact if one seeks to improve the epistemic performance of groups.

[1]  N. Pimlott.  Learning from the neighbours. , 2012, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.

[2]  C. Wagner,et al.  Rational Consensus in Science and Society , 1981 .

[3]  Kevin J. S. Zollman.  The Epistemic Benefit of Transient Diversity , 2009 .

[4]  U. Krause.  A DISCRETE NONLINEAR AND NON–AUTONOMOUS MODEL OF CONSENSUS FORMATION , 2007 .

[5]  Glenn Ellison,et al.  Word-of-Mouth Communication and Social Learning , 1995 .

[6]  P. DeMarzo,et al.  Persuasion Bias, Social Influence, and Uni-Dimensional Opinions , 2001 .

[7]  Matthew O. Jackson,et al.  Naïve Learning in Social Networks and the Wisdom of Crowds , 2010 .

[8]  Rainer Hegselmann,et al.  Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: models, analysis and simulation , 2002, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[9]  Solomon E. Asch,et al.  Opinions and Social Pressure , 1955 .

[10]  Joel E. Cohen,et al.  Approaching consensus can be delicate when positions harden , 1986 .

[11]  Harold Gulliksen,et al.  Contributions to mathematical psychology , 1964 .

[12]  J. French.  A formal theory of social power. , 1956, Psychology Review.

[13]  Kevin J. S. Zollman.  Social structure and the effects of conformity , 2010, Synthese.

[14]  S. Asch.  Opinions and Social Pressure , 1955, Nature.

[15]  R. Berger.  A Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Reaching a Consensus Using DeGroot's Method , 1981 .

[16]  Robert L. Winkler,et al.  The Consensus of Subjective Probability Distributions , 1968 .

[17]  Lu Hong,et al.  Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[18]  E. Seneta,et al.  Towards consensus: some convergence theorems on repeated averaging , 1977, Journal of Applied Probability.

[19]  M. Degroot.  Reaching a Consensus , 1974 .

[20]  Dorwin Cartwright,et al.  Studies in Social Power. , 1960 .

[21]  Camille Roth,et al.  Connections: An Introduction to the Economics of Networks by Sanjeev Goyal , 2010, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[22]  Rainer Hegselmann,et al.  Truth and Cognitive Division of Labour: First Steps Towards a Computer Aided Social Epistemology , 2006, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[23]  Igor Douven,et al.  Extending the Hegselmann–Krause Model III: From Single Beliefs to Complex Belief States , 2009 .

[24]  M. Newman,et al.  Nonequilibrium phase transition in the coevolution of networks and opinions. , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[25]  S. Hartmann,et al.  Consensual Decision-Making Among Epistemic Peers , 2009, Episteme.

[26]  O. Diekmann,et al.  Comment on "Linking population-level models with growing networks: a class of epidemic models". , 2006, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[27]  Kevin J. S. Zollman.  The Communication Structure of Epistemic Communities , 2007, Philosophy of Science.

[28]  Scott E. Page,et al.  Problem Solving by Heterogeneous Agents , 2001, J. Econ. Theory.

[29]  Igor Douven,et al.  Extending the Hegselmann-Krause Model I , 2010, Log. J. IGPL.

[30]  Optimal Publishing Strategies , 2009, Episteme.

[31]  Jan Lorenz,et al.  A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions , 2005, 0708.2981.

[32]  C. Wagner,et al.  Rational Consensus in Science and Society: A Philosophical and Mathematical Study , 1981 .