Agent-based modelling of complex systems in political science: Social norms and tolerance in immigrant societies

Migration is a political issue that has received more attention in recent years. Many questions remain as to how Western societies can successfully absorb migrants- economic arguments have largely been in favour of migration, but the social impact of diversity in previously homogeneous societies has been subject to ongoing debates in social science. Migrant societies are complex social systems with many interacting moving parts. How do rapid migration-changes in society affect the hosts? How do norms of tolerance towards minorities hold up when intergroup con icts emerge? Can segregating behaviour of different population groups be reduced by encouraging different settlement locations for new migrants? The questions address both the physical aspect of migrants entering an already populated space, and the social dimension in which the hosts are adapting their attitudes. I develop a Schelling model using Agent-based modelling to address these questions. I introduce the concept of external migration into an existing society and test how, by varying the kind of migration, introducing diversity affects local tolerance. In the second chapter, I show that large-scale migration results in short-term shocks to the populace, but that these effects are heavily dependent on the population density and how large the native majority is. In Chapter 3 I implement a version of the `contact hypothesis' which stipulates that contact with out-group members increases tolerance and I show that the adaptability increases the importance of native majorities further. In the fourth chapter, I move on to the social norms of tolerance, introducing an ABM in which agents can deceive others by signalling false information about their true attitudes. I show that the emergent pattern of these behaviours can lead to a false consensus effect in which the perceived majority public opinion is unstable. The thesis is able to generate societies that bear many similarities with the Western countries of today and can suggest explanations for the mechanisms that lead to changes in public opinion more negative towards migration, as well as reasons for growing separation of different population groups

The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model

Humans have a demonstrated tendency to copy or imitate the behavior and attitude of others and actively influence each others opinions. In plenty of empirical contexts, publicly revealed opinions are not necessarily in line with internal opinions, causing complex social influence dynamics. We study to what extent hypocrisy is sustained during opinion formation and how hidden opinions change the convergence to consensus in a group. We build and analyze a modified version of the voter model with hypocrisy in a complete graph with a neutral competition between two alternatives. We compare the process from various initial conditions, varying the proportions between the two opinions in the external (revealed) and internal (hidden) layer. According to our results, hypocrisy always prolongs the time needed for reaching a consensus. In a complete graph, this time span increases linearly with group size. We find that the group-level opinion emerges in two steps: (1) a fast and directional process, during which the number of the two kinds of hypocrites equalizes; and (2) a slower, random drift of opinions. During stage (2), the ratio of opinions in the external layer is approximately equal to the ratio in the internal layer; that is, the hidden opinions do not differ significantly from the revealed ones at the group level. We furthermore find that the initial abundances of opinions, but not the initial prevalence of hypocrisy, predicts the mean consensus time and determines the opinions probabilities of winning. These insights highlight the unimportance of hypocrisy in consensus formation under neutral conditions. Our results have important societal implications in relation to hidden voter preferences in polls and improve our understanding of opinion formation in a more realistic setting than that of conventional voter models.Funding Agencies|European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [648693]; NKFIH-OTKA [K109215, K124438, K112929]; Szechenyi 2020 program [GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00019]</p

Monitoring and Expressing Opinions on Social Networking Sites – Empirical Investigations based on the Spiral of Silence Theory

Social networking technologies such as Facebook are increasingly used for the exchange of information and opinions on politically and civically relevant issues. Drawing on the spiral of silence theory, this dissertation investigated the psychological mechanisms leading to the formation of opinion climates on social networking platforms. Specifically, this work focused on (a) whether and how users monitor other people’s opinions through these technologies and (b) under which circumstances they are willing to contribute to these opinion climates by voicing their personal viewpoint on these platforms. These two processes were addressed by five empirical studies. Study 1 examined the effects of different opinion cues (available on Facebook) on people’s inferences about public opinion. Results of a two-session experiment showed that individuals’ fear of isolation sharpened their attention toward user-generated comments, which, in turn, affected recipients’ public opinion perceptions. The latter influenced subjects’ opinions and their willingness to participate in social media discussions. Study 2 explored the situational manifestations of people’s fear of isolation and environmental variables as influence factors of people’s outspokenness. Results from qualitative interviews revealed a variety of sanctions people expect from others when voicing a minority opinion and a series of factors such as the size or the relationship to the audience which could exert an impact on one’s willingness to express their opinion. Study 3 further investigated the expectations of sanctions and their explanatory value regarding people’s communication behavior in different situations. Findings from an experiment demonstrated that the expectation of being personally attacked can explain why people are more inclined to express a minority opinion in offline rather than in online communication settings. Study 4 tested whether the publicness of social networking platforms in terms of the size and relational diversity of the audience affect people’s outspokenness. Results from a cross-cultural experiment showed that in Germany, a higher level of publicness of a controversial discussion on Facebook reduced people’s likelihood to express their viewpoint. This pattern, however, was not found in Singapore. Study 5 analyzed whether the relationship to the audience determines people’s likelihood to express their opinion on Facebook. Findings from an experiment revealed no effects of relational closeness to the audience on outspokenness. Instead, people’s certainty about the prevailing opinion climate among the audience increased their willingness to voice their opinion on Facebook. This collection of studies extends the previous state of knowledge by testing the validity of the spiral of silence theory but also pointing to potential boundaries thereof in the context of increasingly popular communication environments.Soziale Netzwerktechnologien wie Facebook werden immer mehr zum Informations- und Meinungsaustausch hinsichtlich politisch und gesellschaftlich relevanter Themen genutzt. Vor diesem Hintergrund untersucht die vorliegende Dissertation auf Basis der Theorie der Schweigespirale die psychologischen Mechanismen, die zur Bildung von Meinungsklimata auf sozialen Netzwerkplattformen führen. Dabei betrachtet diese Arbeit, (a) ob und wie Nutzer/innen anhand dieser Technologien die Meinungen anderer Menschen wahrnehmen und (b) unter welchen Umständen sie bereit sind, zu diesem Meinungsklima beizutragen und ihre Meinung auf diesen Plattformen zu äußern. Diese zwei Prozesse wurden mit Hilfe von fünf empirischen Studien analysiert. Studie 1 untersuchte die Wirkungen von verschiedenen Meinungs-Hinweisreizen (auf Facebook) auf die individuelle Wahrnehmung der öffentlichen Meinung. Ein zweiwelliges Experiment zeigte, dass die dispositionelle Isolationsfurcht die Aufmerksamkeit auf nutzergenerierte Kommentare erhöhte, welche wiederum die Wahrnehmungen des öffentlichen Meinungsklimas beeinflussten. Diese wirkten sich auf die persönliche Meinung der Rezipient/inn/en sowie deren Bereitschaft, sich an dieser thematischen Diskussion auf Facebook zu beteiligen, aus. Studie 2 fokussierte die situativen Erscheinungsformen der Isolationsfurcht und Umgebungsvariablen als Einflussfaktoren der Redebereitschaft. Anhand der Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Interview-Studie ließen sich diverse Sanktionen identifizieren, die Menschen von ihrer Umgebung erwarten, wenn sie eine Minderheitsmeinung kundtun würden, sowie eine Reihe von Faktoren, etwa die Größe oder die Beziehung zum Publikum, die Einfluss auf die Bereitschaft zur Meinungsäußerung nehmen könnten. Studie 3 analysierte weiterhin die Erklärungskraft der erwarteten Sanktionen auf das Kommunikationsverhalten in unterschiedlichen Situationen. Ein Experiment zeigte, dass die Erwartung, von anderen persönlich attackiert zu werden, einen Grund darstellt, warum Menschen eher dazu bereit sind, eine Minderheitsmeinung in der Offline- als in der Online-Kommunikation zu äußern. Studie 4 testete, ob die Öffentlichkeit auf sozialen Netzwerkseiten im Sinne der Größe und Diversität des Publikums die Redebereitschaft von den Nutzer/inne/n beeinflusst. Die Ergebnisse eines kulturvergleichenden Experiments legten offen, dass der höhere Öffentlichkeitsgrad einer kontroversen Diskussion auf Facebook – in Deutschland – die Wahrscheinlichkeit senkt, dass Menschen bei dieser Diskussion ihren Standpunkt zum Thema äußern. Dieses Muster konnte in Singapur nicht festgestellt werden. Studie 5 untersuchte, ob die Beziehung zum Publikum die Redebereitschaft zu einem kontroversen Thema beeinflussen kann. Ein Experiment fand jedoch keinen Effekt der Beziehungsnähe zum Publikum auf die Bereitwilligkeit von Nutzer/innen, ihre Meinung zum Thema auf Facebook kundzutun. Stattdessen erwies sich die verspürte Sicherheit über das wahrgenommene Meinungsklima unter dem entsprechenden Publikum als entscheidend: Je höher diese war, desto eher waren Menschen bereit, ihre Meinung auf Facebook kundzutun. Diese Studienreihe erweitert den aktuellen Forschungsstand, indem sie die Gültigkeit der Theorie der Schweigespirale, aber auch deren Grenzen in zunehmend beliebten Kommunikationsumgebungen aufzeigt

Examining Dehumanization Through the "Political Brain Perspective": Towards a Minimal Neuropolitical Theory for Hyperdiverse Societies

What cognitive conditions need to be in place in order for cooperation, and potentially, solidarity, to exist in hyperdiverse societies? What aspects of our social human brain are indispensible when it comes to achieving shared goals in divided liberal democracies? This dissertation singles out the dehumanized perception and categorization of out-groups as one of the most decisive disruptors of political cooperation. I develop an interdisciplinary model – the “Political Brain Perspective” (PBP) – that combines political theory, political science and social neuroscience insights to advance my argument about dehumanization in both domestic and International political contexts. I argue that dehumanized perception at the brain level is politically troublesome because it disables an important social brain function called mentalizing, which is foundational for both basic political transactions and more complex feelings such as empathy. I show how this is relevant in regard to the neuropolitical duties public representatives owe to their constituents in a diverse liberal democracy, and further, how various liberal traditions such as social contract, multiculturalism and human rights theories have hitherto ignored dehumanization as a fundamental disruptor to any political cooperative process. At the international level, I examine the potential for dehumanization within civilizational discourses in history, with a particular focus on the post-Cold War distinction between “civilized” and “barbarians”. I show that in the international context of genocide, intergroup conflict and identity politics, dehumanizing categories not only diminish the cognitive reasoning and mentalizing abilities of the dehumanizer, but also have an intense impact on the dehumanized, in the form of reciprocal dehumanization and retributive violence. Based on the epistemological premises of the PBP, I contend that a minimal neuropolitical theory of cooperation ought not to prioritize an ontological concept of human dignity but instead treat the ascription of humanness as an interpersonal brain mechanism. The brain data, in other words, can only tell us what our brains do when engaging in politics, not who we are as political beings in an essentialist way. In sum, this dissertation highlights the need for political scientists to pay attention to the neuronal mechanisms underlying dehumanization, and to distinguish it from other forms of exclusion and prejudice as a fundamental brain ability in its own right

Voice and silence in public debate: Modelling and observing collective opinion expression online

This thesis investigates how group-level differences in willingness of opinion expression shape the extent to which certain standpoints are visible in public debate online. Against the backdrop of facilitated communication and connection to like-minded others through digital technologies, models and methods are developed and case studies are carried out – by and large from a network perspective. To this end, we first propose a model of opinion dynamics that examines social- structural conditions for public opinion expression or even predominance of different groups. The model focuses not on opinion change, but on the decision of individuals whether to express their opinion publicly or not. Groups of agents with different, fixed opinions interact with each other, changing the willingness to express their opinion according to the feedback they receive from others. We formulate the model as a multi-group game, and subsequently provide a dynamical systems perspective by introducing reinforcement learning dynamics. We show that a minority can dominate public discourse if its internal connections are sufficiently dense. Moreover, increased costs for opinion expression can drive even internally well-connected groups into silence. We then focus on how interaction networks can be used to infer political and social positions. For this purpose, we develop a new type of force-directed network layout algorithm. While being widely used, a rigorous interpretation of the outcomes of existing force-directed algorithms has not been provided yet. We argue that interpretability can be delivered by latent space approaches, which have the goal of embedding a network in an underlying social space. On the basis of such a latent space model, we derive a force-directed layout algorithm that can not only be used for the spatialisation of generic network data – exemplified by Twitter follower and retweet networks, as well as Facebook friendship networks – but also for the visualization of surveys. Comparison to existing layout algorithms (which are not grounded in an interpretable model) reveals that node groups are placed in similar configurations, while said algorithms show a stronger intra-cluster separation of nodes, as well as a tendency to separate clusters more strongly in retweet networks. In two case studies, we observe actual public debate on the social media platform Twitter – topics are the Saxon state elections 2019, and violent riots in the city of Leipzig on New Year’s Eve in the same year. We show that through the interplay of retweet and reply networks, it is possible to identify differences in willingness of opinion expression on the platform between opinion groups. We find that for both events, propensities to get involved in debate are asymmetric. Users retweeting far-right parties and politicians are significantly more active, making their positions disproportionately visible. Said users also act significantly more confrontational in the sense that they reply mostly to users from different groups, while the contrary is not the case. The findings underline that naive reliance on what others express online can be collectively dangerous, especially in an era in which social media shapes public discourse to an unprecedented extent

Environmental Effects on Health: Ignorance and Undone Science

Considerable research has been completed showing that environmental exposures can have significant effects on people’s health, especially in terms of autoimmune conditions, cancers, and neurological and psychological conditions. Health effects are possible at exposure levels far below those generally considered safe by orthodox health authorities. A prime example is multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), where sufferers themselves have made clear, short-term associations between health effects and low-level environmental exposures. The condition of MCS is not clearly definable and significantly overlaps with other, largely unrecognised health conditions including fibromyalgia (FMS), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), electro hypersensitivity syndrome (EHS) and chronic inflammatory response syndrome (CIRS). The orthodox medical diagnostic process is implicated in the production of ignorance on such health conditions. Despite the large amount of research showing health effects from low level environmental exposures, there remains much “undone science” in the field - research that could be done but isn’t. The reasons for undone science and the consequent societal ignorance are generally due to society’s ingrained desire for technological improvements. Industry, responsible for technological developments the use of chemical products or radiation devices, is not interested in possible health effects, so expensive scientific research into them is left undone. When subsequent research or firsthand experiences of health effects start to be realised there is ample evidence that the industries responsible for environmental exposures then become active in generating ignorance. Due to close ties with industry, medical and health systems become complicit in industry’s strategy, and knowledge is manipulated by the industry funding of scientific studies, which then influences the conclusions of the research. The support of industry products by institutions, including regulatory agencies, due to conflicts of interest also contributes to knowledge manipulation. Common industry strategies of generating ignorance also include using doubt, blame, power, industry shills, astroturfing, smear campaigns, media manipulation and fact checking services. Future generations of children who inherit contaminants from their conception will be most affected by the gross neglect of their effect on health. The carry-through of health effects and their magnification in subsequent generations is a tragedy in the making