Social structure and the effects of conformity

Synthese

Volumn 172, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 317-340

  Zollman, Kevin James Spears ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Agent based model; Conformity; Social epistemology; Social network; Social structure

Indexed keywords

EID: 77349091305     PISSN: 00397857     EISSN: 15730964     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-008-9393-8     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Agur Z. (1987) Resilience and variability in pathogens and hosts. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Medicine and Biology 4: 295-307.
2. Agur Z., Fraenkel A., Klein S. (1988) The number of fixed points of the majority rule. Discrete Mathematics 70: 295-302.
3. Asch S. E. (1955) Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American 193(5): 31-35.
4. Asch, S. (1956). Studies of independence and submission to group pressure: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9).
5. Banerjee A. V. (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 107(3): 797-817.
6. Baron R. S., Vandello J. A., Brunsman B. (1996) The forgotten variable in conformity research: Impact of task importance on social influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(5): 915-927.
7. Ben-Yashar R., Paroush J. (2000) A nonasymptotic condorcet jury theorem. Social Choice and Welfare 17: 189-199.
8. Bikhchandani S., Hirshleifer D., Welch I. (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100(5): 992-1026.
9. Brock, W. A., & Durlauf, S. N. (2002). A formal model of theory choice in science. In P. Mirowski & E.-M. Sent (Eds.), Science bought and sold: Essays in the economics of science (Chap. 11, pp. 341-361). University of Chicago Press.
10. Clifford P., Sudbury A. (1973) A model for spatial conflict. Biometrika 60(3): 581-588.
11. DeMarzo P. M., Vayanos D., Zwiebel J. (2003) Persuasion bias, social influence, and uni-dimensional opinions. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(3): 909-968.
12. Durrett R., Steif J. E. (1993) Fixation results for threshold voter systems. The Annals of Probability 21(1): 232-247.
13. Flocchini, P., Lodi, E., Luccio, F., Pagli, L., & Santoro, N. (1998). Irreversible dynamos in tori. In Euro-Par98 parallel processing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (p. 1). Springer.
14. Goldman A. (1999) Knowledge in a social world. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
15. Goles E., Olivos J. (1980) Periodic behavior of generalized threshold functions. Discrete Mathematics 30: 187-189.
16. Granville A. (1991) On a paper of Agur, Fraenkel and Klein. Discrete Mathematics 94: 147-151.
17. Hassin Y., Peleg D. (2001) Distributed probabilistic polling and applications to proportionate agreement. Information and Computation 171: 248-268.
18. Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2002). Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(3).
19. Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2006). Truth and the cognitive division of labor: First steps toward computer aided social epistemology. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 9(3).
20. Holley R. A., Liggett T. M. (1975) Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model. The Annals of Probability 3(4): 643-663.
21. Kitcher P. (1990) The division of cognitive labor. The Journal of Philosophy 87(1): 5-22.
22. Kitcher P. (1993) The advancement of science. Oxford University Press, New York.
23. Kitcher P. (2002) Social psychology and the theory of science. In: Stich S., Siegal M.(eds) The cognitive basis of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
24. Královic, R. (2001). On majority voting games in trees. In SOFSEM 2001: Theory and Practice of Informatics: 28th Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics Piestany, Slovak Republic, November 24-December 1, 2001, p. 282.
25. Latané B., Nowak A. (1997) Self-organizing social systems: Necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of clustering consolidation, and continuing diversity. Progress in Communication Sciences 13: 43-74.
26. Moran G. (1994a) Parametrization for stationary patterns of the r-majority operators on 0-1 sequences. Discrete Mathematics 132: 175-195.
27. Moran G. (1994b) The r-majority vote action on 0-1 sequences. Discrete Mathematics 132: 145-174.
28. Moran G. (1995) On the period-two-property of the majority operator in infinite graphs. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 5(347): 1649-1667.
29. Mustafa N. H., Pekev A. (2004) Listen to your neighbors: How (not) to reach a consensus. SAIM Journal of Discrete Mathematics 17(4): 634-660.
30. Nakata, T., Imahayashi, H., & Yamashita, M. (1999). Probabilistic local majority voting for the agreement problem on finite graphs. In E. A. T. Asano (Ed.), COCOON '99 LNCS 1627 (pp. 330-338).
31. Nakata T., Imahayashi H., Yamashita M. (2000) A probabilistic local majority polling game on weighted directed graphs with an application to the distributed agreement problem. Networks 35(4): 266-273.
32. Peleg D. (1998) Size bound for dynamic monopolies. Discrete Applied Mathematics 86: 263-273.
33. Peleg D. (2002) Local majorities, coalitions and monopolies in graphs: A review. Theoretical Computer Science 282: 231-257.
34. Poljak S., Sura M. (1983) On periodical behaviour in societies with symmetric influences. Combinatorica 3(1): 119-121.
35. Sarkar H. (2007) Group Rationality in Scientific Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
36. Steif J. E. (1994) The threshold voter automaton at a critical point. The Annals of Probability 22(3): 1121-1139.
37. Strevens M. (2003) The role of the priority rule in science. Journal of Philosophy 100(2): 55-79.
38. Strevens M. (2006) The role of the matthew effect in science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37: 159-170.
39. Weisberg, M., Muldoon, R. (forthcoming). Epistemic landscapes and the division of cognitive labor. Philosophy of Science.
40. Welch I. (1992) Sequential sales, learning, and cascades. The Journal of Finance 47(2): 695-732.
41. Zollman K. J. (2007a) The communication structure of epistemic communities. Philosophy of Science 74(5): 574-587.
42. Zollman, K. J. (2007b). The epistemic benefit of transient diversity. Manuscript.