Investigation of social influence dynamics requires mathematical models that are "simple" enough to admit rigorous analysis, and yet sufficiently "rich" to capture salient features of social groups. Thus, the mechanism of iterative opinion pooling from (DeGroot, 1974), which can explain the generation of consensus, was elaborated in (Friedkin and Johnsen, 1999) to take into account individuals' ongoing attachments to their initial opinions, or prejudices. The "anchorage" of individuals to their prejudices may disable reaching consensus and cause disagreement in a social influence network. Further elaboration of this model may be achieved by relaxing its restrictive assumption of a time-invariant influence network. During opinion dynamics on an issue, arcs of interpersonal influence may be added or subtracted from the network, and the influence weights assigned by an individual to his/her neighbors may alter. In this paper, we establish new important properties of the (Friedkin and Johnsen, 1999) opinion formation model, and also examine its extension to time-varying social influence networks.

Optimal decisions on the distribution of finite resources are explicitly structured by mathematical models that specify relevant variables, constraints, and objectives. Here we report analysis and evidence that implicit mathematical structures are also involved in group decision-making on resource allocation distributions under conditions of uncertainty that disallow formal optimization. A group's array of initial distribution preferences automatically sets up a geometric decision space of alternative resource distributions. Weighted averaging mechanisms of interpersonal influence reduce the heterogeneity of the group's initial preferences on a suitable distribution. A model of opinion formation based on weighted averaging predicts a distribution that is a feasible point in the group's implicit initial decision space.

AbstractBalance theory has advanced with interdisciplinary contributions from social science, physical science, engineering, and mathematics. The common focus of attention is social networks in which every individual has either a positive or negative, cognitive or emotional, appraisal of every other individual. The current frontier of work on balance theory is a hunt for a dynamical model that predicts the temporal evolution of any such appraisal network to a particular structure in the complete set of balanced networks allowed by the theory. Finding such a model has proved to be a difficult problem. In this article, we contribute a parsimonious solution of the problem that explicates the conditions under which a network will evolve either to a set of mutually antagonistic cliques or to an asymmetric structure that allows agreement, cooperation, and compromise among cliques.

Structural balance is a classic property of signed graphs satisfying Heider's seminal axioms. Mathematical sociologists have studied balance theory since its inception in the 1040s. Recent research has focused on the development of dynamic models explaining the emergence of structural balance. In this paper, we introduce a novel class of parsimonious dynamic models for structural balance based on an interpersonal influence process. Our proposed models are gradient flows of an energy function, called the dissonance function, which captures the cognitive dissonance arising from violations of Heider's axioms. Thus, we build a new connection with the literature on energy landscape minimization. This gradient flow characterization allows us to study the transient and asymptotic behaviors of our model. We provide mathematical and numerical results describing the critical points of the dissonance function.

Breakthroughs have been made in algorithmic approaches to understanding how individuals in a group influence each other to reach a consensus. However, what happens to the group consensus if it depends on several statements, one of which is proven false? Here, we show how the existence of logical constraints on beliefs affect the collective convergence to a shared belief system and, in contrast, how an idiosyncratic set of arbitrarily linked beliefs held by a few may become held by many.

Unlike many complex networks studied in the literature, social networks rarely exhibit unanimous behavior, or consensus. This requires a development of mathematical models that are sufficiently simple to be examined and capture, at the same time, the complex behavior of real social groups, where opinions and actions related to them may form clusters of different size. One such model, proposed by Friedkin and Johnsen, extends the idea of conventional consensus algorithm (also referred to as the iterative opinion pooling) to take into account the actors' prejudices, caused by some exogenous factors and leading to disagreement in the final opinions. In this paper, we offer a novel multidimensional extension, describing the evolution of the agents' opinions on several topics. Unlike the existing models, these topics are interdependent, and hence the opinions being formed on these topics are also mutually dependent. We rigorous examine stability properties of the proposed model, in particular, convergence of the agents' opinions. Although our model assumes synchronous communication among the agents, we show that the same final opinions may be reached "on average" via asynchronous gossip-based protocols.