Abstract

We propose and study a model for the interplay between two different dynamical processes --one for opinion formation and the other for decision making-- on two interconnected networks AA and BB. The opinion dynamics on network AA corresponds to that of the M-model, where the state of each agent can take one of four possible values (S=−2,−1,1,2S=-2,-1,1,2), describing its level of agreement on a given issue. The likelihood to become an extremist (S=±2S=\pm 2) or a moderate (S=±1S=\pm 1) is controlled by a reinforcement parameter r≥0r \ge 0. The decision making dynamics on network BB is akin to that of the Abrams-Strogatz model, where agents can be either in favor (S=+1S=+1) or against (S=−1S=-1) the issue. The probability that an agent changes its state is proportional to the fraction of neighbors that hold the opposite state raised to a power ββ. Starting from a polarized case scenario in which all agents of network AA hold positive orientations while all agents of network BB have a negative orientation, we explore the conditions under which one of the dynamics prevails over the other, imposing its initial orientation. We find that, for a given value of ββ, the two-network system reaches a consensus in the positive state (initial state of network AA) when the reinforcement overcomes a crossover value r∗(β)r^*(β), while a negative consensus happens for r<r∗(β)r<r^*(β). In the r−βr-β phase space, the system displays a transition at a critical threshold βcβ_c, from a coexistence of both orientations for β<βcβ<β_c to a dominance of one orientation for β>βcβ>β_c. We develop an analytical mean-field approach that gives an insight into these regimes and shows that both dynamics are equivalent along the crossover line (r∗,β∗)(r^*,β^*).

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.