Computational modeling and big data Presentation for discussion forum “Theory and mechanisms of social interaction in the big data era” Son Bernadinet,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Jacob Goldenberg, Barak Libai, and Eitan Muller
Advertisements

Introduction to Psychology
Yinyin Yuan and Chang-Tsun Li Computer Science Department
How To Think.
An Adjusted Matching Market: Adding a Cost to Proposing Joschka Tryba Brian Cross Stephen Hebson.
Mobile Communication Networks Vahid Mirjalili Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology.
Correlational and Differential Research
Communicating for Results 9e 9 Key Ideas Defining small group Characteristics of successful problem-solving teams Group formats Small-Group Communication.
Myers’ PSYCHOLOGY (7th Ed)
Psychology: A Modular Approach to Mind and Behavior, Tenth Edition, Dennis Coon Appendix Appendix: Behavioral Statistics.
Table of Contents Exit Appendix Behavioral Statistics.
Targeted and Tailored Health Messages: What’s the better value? Madeleine J. Kerr, RN, PhD, Karen A. Monsen, RN, PhD(c), Kay Savik MS School of Nursing.
Linear Transformation and Statistical Estimation and the Law of Large Numbers Target Goal: I can describe the effects of transforming a random variable.
AP Psychology. 1. Psychological studies almost always come to conclusions that affirm human intuition. 2. Psychological studies almost always come to.
Algorithmic and Economic Aspects of Networks Nicole Immorlica.
Some results from Scottish data The Statistical Analysis of the Dynamics of Networks and Behaviour: An Application to Smoking and Drinking Behaviour among.
(c) 2006 by Pearson Education. All Rights Reserved. American Families Beirne-Smith et al. Mental Retardation, Seventh Edition Copyright ©2006 Pearson Education,
Why more contact may increase cultural polarization Presentation prepared for QMSS Seminar Networks and Behavior: Statistical Models and Advances in the.
Forecasting.
Clustered or Multilevel Data
A/S/L? Homophily of Online and Face to Face Social Ties Gustavo S. Mesch & Ilan Talmud Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Haifa.
A Model of Opinion Dynamics Among Firms Volker Barth, GELENA research group, Oldenburg University Potentials of Complexity Science for Business, Governments,
Why Globalized Communication may increase Cultural Polarization Paper presented at 2005 International Workshop Games, Networks, and Cascades Cornell Club.
4 Forecasting PowerPoint presentation to accompany Heizer and Render
Aaker, Kumar, Day Seventh Edition Instructor’s Presentation Slides
Correctness of Gossip-Based Membership under Message Loss Maxim Gurevich, Idit Keidar Technion.
Chapter 5: Descriptive Research Describe patterns of behavior, thoughts, and emotions among a group of individuals. Provide information about characteristics.
Slides by John Loucks St. Edward’s University.
Chapter 3 An Overview of Quantitative Research
Dynamic Models of Segregation
電管碩一 R 凌伊亭 Social Media Use In a Mobile Broadband Environment : Examination of Determinants of Twitter and Facebook Use International Journal of.
Dan Ao Department of Sociology The Chinese University of Hong Kong May 30 th, 2008.
Designing a Random Assignment Social Experiment In the U.K.; The Employment Retention and Advancement Demonstration (ERA)
Slide 1 Estimating Performance Below the National Level Applying Simulation Methods to TIMSS Fourth Annual IES Research Conference Dan Sherman, Ph.D. American.
Portfolio Theory Chapter 7
2002/4/10IDSL seminar Estimating Business Targets Advisor: Dr. Hsu Graduate: Yung-Chu Lin Data Source: Datta et al., KDD01, pp
The attraction hypothesis
Reliability: Introduction. Reliability Session 1.Definitions & Basic Concepts of Reliability 2.Theoretical Approaches 3.Empirical Assessments of Reliability.
Communication & Intercultural Competence
Correlational Research Chapter Fifteen Bring Schraw et al.
Variables, sampling, and sample size. Overview  Variables  Types of variables  Sampling  Types of samples  Why specific sampling methods are used.
Today’s topics Strength of Weak Ties Next Topic Acknowledgements
On Disciplinary Fragmentation and Scientific Progress Stefano Balietti, Michael Mäs, and Dirk Helbing ETH Zurich, Chair of Sociology in particular Modeling.
Theories of Communication Effects: Communication Science & Research
“Social Influence” Chapter 7 How do group members influence one another’s opinions?
Belief Change via Social Influence and Explanatory Coherence Bruce Edmonds Centre for Policy Modelling Manchester Metropolitan University.
Chapter 2 Concepts For Social And Cultural Theories Key Terms.
Inference: Probabilities and Distributions Feb , 2012.
DO LOCAL MODIFICATION RULES ALLOW EFFICIENT LEARNING ABOUT DISTRIBUTED REPRESENTATIONS ? A. R. Gardner-Medwin THE PRINCIPLE OF LOCAL COMPUTABILITY Neural.
Marshall University School of Medicine Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology BMS 617 Lecture 11: Models Marshall University Genomics Core Facility.
Its a specific set of linkages among a defined set of persons with the additional property that the characteristics of these linkages as a whole may be.
(Environment: Uncertainty
V7 Foundations of Probability Theory „Probability“ : degree of confidence that an event of an uncertain nature will occur. „Events“ : we will assume that.
Reliability: Introduction. Reliability Session 1.Definitions & Basic Concepts of Reliability 2.Theoretical Approaches 3.Empirical Assessments of Reliability.
Does auto change residential segregation? Does telephone make us more or less sociable? Does TV viewing make us more violent? Does Internet use make us.
What is Research?. Intro.  Research- “Any honest attempt to study a problem systematically or to add to man’s knowledge of a problem may be regarded.
1 Chapter 11 Understanding Randomness. 2 Why Random? What is it about chance outcomes being random that makes random selection seem fair? Two things:
Sociology. Sociology is a science because it uses the same techniques as other sciences Explaining social phenomena is what sociological theory is all.
7-1 Chapter 7 Charles P. Jones, Investments: Analysis and Management, Tenth Edition, John Wiley & Sons Prepared by G.D. Koppenhaver, Iowa State University.
Topics In Social Computing (67810) Module 1 Introduction & The Structure of Social Networks.
WEEK 1: INTRODUCTION. Cultural diversity brings challenges to humankind.  negative - confusion, misunderstanding and conflicts.  positive - opportunities;
STEPS IN RESEARCH PROCESS 1. Identification of Research Problems This involves Identifying existing problems in an area of study (e.g. Home Economics),
Risk aversion and networks Microfoundations for network formation
AF1: Thinking Scientifically
Network Science: A Short Introduction i3 Workshop
Patterns of Involuntary Technology Adoption
Aiying Chen, Scott Patterson, Fabrice Bailleux and Ehab Bassily
Department of Computer Science University of York
Additional notes on random variables
Additional notes on random variables
Presentation transcript:

Computational modeling and big data Presentation for discussion forum “Theory and mechanisms of social interaction in the big data era” Son Bernadinet, May 6-8, 2013 Andreas Flache University of Groningen, Department of Sociology – ICS

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 The “big data challenge” Strong version: “ Correlation supersedes causation, and science can advance even without coherent models, unified theories, or really any mechanistic explanation at all. ” Anderson, 2008 | 2

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 A weaker version Having “more data” we need “less theory” to understand social processes. Example: predict performance of large organizations from structure of networks between employees (e.g. “small world”) without having to know the “content” of the actual network relations. | 3

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Why Polarization in political opinions? (DiMaggio et al. 1996, Evans 2003, Fischer et al 2009) 4 increasing variance of opinion distribution in some issues in some historical periods (e.g. Sexual morality; attitudes towards poor people; lifestyles; consumption tastes) Research on small groups: evidence of opinion differences increasing over time (van Knippenberg et al. 2007, Early et al. 2000, Feldman 1969) Political polarization in the internet (Lazer ea 2009)

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Why social diversity and polarization? A puzzle? Two powerful and general mechanisms in interpersonal interaction Homophily  the more similar people are, the more they influence each other. Influence  the more people influence each other, the more similar they become. How can there be stable diversity in opinions (e.g. on cultural issues) in a world where nobody is entirely disconnected from influence? 5

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 | 6 A macro-social condition: complex networks ›Small world networks: local clustering and global integration: does this breed consensus? ›We argue that this depends on the micro-processes  Flache, A., & Macy, M.W Small Worlds and Cultural Polarization. Journal of Mathematical Sociology Pp

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Microtheory 1: only homophily and ‘positive’ influence ›Following earlier social influence models (French etc) Positive influence: Move towards weighted average opinion (o) of local neighbours opinion 1 0 social influence

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 ›Following earlier social influence models (French etc) Positive influence: Move towards weighted average opinion (s) of local neighbours Homophily: change relational weight w The more similarity opinions i-j, the more influence does j have Microtheory 1: only homophily and ‘positive’ influence

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Microtheory 2: xenophobia and ‘negative’ influence added (c.f. Macy ea, 2003; Baldassari & Bearman, 2007; Fent, Groeber & Schweitzer, 2007;…) Positive and negative influence local neighbours “pull” or “push” depending on weight w ij Homophily and xenophobia: change relational weight w average distance > zero  positive weight, else negative distance + _ weight

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 A computational experiment ›Add small proportion of “random ties” between initially disconnected clusters Compare effects micro-theory 1, and micro-theory 2 N=100, 20 “caves”, K=2, opinion initially uniform random | 10  p add tie = Density D = 0.04 Clustering C = 1.0 Density D = Clustering C = Average path length L = ∞ Average path length L = 6.29

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Microtheory 1: homophily and positive influence | 11 Outcome polarization measure P P=0: consensus P=1 Perfect polarization in two opposing factions Adding random ties reduces polarization

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Microtheory 2: …plus xenophobia and negative influence | 12 Outcome polarization measure P P=0: consensus P=1 Perfect polarization in two opposing factions Adding random ties increases polarization

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Tentative conclusion “Small worlds and polarization” ›Knowing the structure is not enough ›Prediction of theories of social influence and selection depends decisively on microprocess: Only homophily and positive influence:  Smaller world fosters consensus also xenophobia and negative influence:  smaller world can increase polarization

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Big data and computational modelling ›Even if we had “big data” on the structure of social networks between all members of a large population (e.g. mobile phone calls, c.f. Eagle, Macy 2010, Science) ›… we need to know how “process sensitive” outcomes are in a given structure (computational modelling) ›… we need more and better data to know how people’s opinions affect each other in social interaction. “big data”? “high quality small data”: lab experiments 0nline experiments (but little control on subjects) “sentiment analysis” of online interactions? (not yet sufficiently accurate) | 14

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May We conducted a series of 4 experiments with in total 443 subjects. Overall design: Measure subjects’ opinions on pre-selected issues. E.g. “ percent of immigrants who come to the Netherlands for economic reasons should receive a residence permit. ” ›Pair subjects varying distance on opinions and other characteristics. ›Repeated sequence of exposure to others’ opinions, (exchange messages to influence each other) adjust opinions. ›Attractions (“weights”) were also measured repeatedly ›In some conditions, we manipulated initial attraction E.g. dictator games, football support, different moral positions Empirical research: experiments (Takács e.a. in progress)

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Results experiments (1) No effect initial opinion distance on direction of influence | 16 Negative shift positive shift

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Results experiments (2) Also no effect of (induced) initial disliking  No evidence for negative influence in lab. | 17

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Polarization without negative influence A model based on persuasive argument theory (Mäs, Takács, Flache & Jehn, 2012, Organization Science) ›Agents differ by demographic characteristics and by opinion ›Opinion is constituted by number of pro- and con arguments held by agents (e.g. arg_vector  opinion = ) ›Homophily: the more similar agents, the more likely they interact ›Influence: if agent i interacts with j, then i adopts one of the arguments currently held by j and ‘forgets’ another argument previously held. | 18

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Polarization with maximal faultline strength | 19 But this only happens when initial opinion is sufficiently correlated with demographic attributes (demographically biased opinions)

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 How “criss-crossing” agents prevent polarization A “criss-crossing” agent shares at least one demographic attribute with each of the subgroups  a small probability of interaction between subgroups always remains  The faultline can never be maximal  Sooner or later arguments will be communicated between opposing subgroups and the system moves into consensus eventually | 20

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 Strong faultline with three ‘criss-crossing’ agents (N=20) | 21 Polarization in the short run Consensus in the long run

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 A bold generalization “Big data” on opinion formation are (only?) useful in combination with › (computational) modelling of underlying mechanisms and ›“high quality small data” | 22

Flache, ThefoDa discussion meeting– San Bernardino, May 2013 What if we had the ideal “big data”? ›Record of all interactions between individual members of a population (who does when interact with whom) ›Proxy: geographical residence of all members of the population, other places where they meet (employers, voluntary associations, …) ›Their opinions on a range of issues pre- post interaction (or in temporally fine-grained panel) ›A range of individual characteristics (demographic…) | 23