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 A and B. The opinion dynamics on
network A corresponds to that of the M-model, where the state of each agent
can take one of four possible values (S=−2,−1,1,2), describing its level of
agreement on a given issue. The likelihood to become an extremist (S=±2)
or a moderate (S=±1) is controlled by a reinforcement parameter r≥0.
The decision making dynamics on network B is akin to that of the
Abrams-Strogatz model, where agents can be either in favor (S=+1) or against
(S=−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 β. Starting from a polarized case scenario in which all agents
of network A hold positive orientations while all agents of network B 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 β, the two-network system reaches a consensus
in the positive state (initial state of network A) when the reinforcement
overcomes a crossover value r∗(β), while a negative consensus happens
for r<r∗(β). In the r−β phase space, the system displays a
transition at a critical threshold βc, from a coexistence of both
orientations for β<βc to a dominance of one orientation for
β>βc. 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∗).Comment: 25 pages, 6 figure