Statistical mechanics of opinion formation and collective behavior: Micro‐sociology

The process of opinion formation leading to collective behavior in large groups is modeled with a probabilistic and statistical mechanical theory of micro‐sociological behavior. By assuming that the probability of making a given decision is proportional to the number of people who have made the same decision, this theory of micro‐interactions predicts the manner in which individuals will respond to groups, how groups will respond to individuals, and how minorities and majorities will respond to each other. In particular, the theory accurately predicts observations of chivalry, tip sizes, conformity, and gawking in groups. Guided by intuition of social behavior and analogies with physical theories, social forces and social temperatures have also been introduced as concepts relevant to group interactions. These parameters significantly improve the theory's fit to empirical data.

[1]  D. Helbing.  A Mathematical Model for the Behavior of Individuals in a Social Field , 1994, cond-mat/9805194.

[2]  Andrzej Nowak,et al.  Measuring emergent social phenomena: Dynamism, polarization, and clustering as order parameters of social systems , 1994 .

[3]  Douglas D. Heckathorn,et al.  Collective Action and Group Heterogeneity: Voluntary Provision Versus Selective Incentives , 1993 .

[4]  B. Huberman,et al.  The outbreak of cooperation , 1993 .

[5]  G. Marwell,et al.  The critical mass in collective action , 1993 .

[6]  B. Latané,et al.  Statistical mechanics of social impact. , 1992, Physical review. A, Atomic, molecular, and optical physics.

[7]  M. Macy.  Chains of Cooperation: Threshold Effects in Collective Action , 1991 .

[8]  Michael W. Macy,et al.  Learning Theory and the Logic of Critical Mass , 1990 .

[9]  William E. Feinberg,et al.  Elementary Social Structure and the Resolution of Ambiguity: Some Results from a Computer Simulation Model , 1990 .

[10]  B. Latané,et al.  From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. , 1990 .

[11]  William E. Feinberg,et al.  “Outside Agitators” and Crowds: Results from a Computer Simulation Model , 1988 .

[12]  G. Marwell,et al.  Social Networks and Collective Action: A Theory of the Critical Mass. III , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[13]  G. Marwell,et al.  THE PARADOX OF GROUP SIZE IN COLLECTIVE ACTION: A THEORY OF THE CRITICAL MASS. II. * , 1988 .

[14]  R. Durrett.  Lecture notes on particle systems and percolation , 1988 .

[15]  G. Marwell,et al.  A Theory of the Critical Mass. I. Interdependence, Group Heterogeneity, and the Production of Collective Action , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[16]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  Social Influence Model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. , 1984 .

[17]  Brian Mullen,et al.  Operationalizing the effect of the group on the individual: A self-attention perspective , 1983 .

[18]  W. Weidlich,et al.  Concepts and Models of a Quantitative Sociology , 1983 .

[19]  B. Latané.  The psychology of social impact. , 1981 .

[20]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Threshold Models of Collective Behavior , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[21]  William E. Feinberg,et al.  A Computer Simulation of the Emergence of Consensus in Crowds , 1977 .

[22]  S. Ross,et al.  A First Course in Probability , 1977 .

[23]  Thomas L. Conner,et al.  Decision-Making and Social Influence: A Revised Model and Further Experimental Evidence , 1976 .

[24]  D. Shapero,et al.  A theory of social imitation , 1974 .

[25]  W. Weidlich,et al.  THE STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION OF POLARIZATION PHENOMENA IN SOCIETY , 1971 .