Collective beliefs and individual stubbornness in the dynamics of public debates

TL;DR

This paper models how collective beliefs and individual stubbornness influence public debate outcomes, revealing counterintuitive effects and applying the model to issues like global warming.

Contribution

It introduces a model combining fixed collective biases with adjustable individual stubbornness to analyze opinion dynamics in public debates.

Findings

Counterintuitive debate outcomes explained by the model

Stubbornness levels can oppose collective biases effectively

Application to global warming debates illustrates the model's relevance

Abstract

The combined effects of collective beliefs and individual stubbornness in the dynamic of a public debate are investigated using the Galam sequential probabilistic model of opinion dynamics. The study is focused on pair interactions for which the bias produced by collective beliefs is the decisive factor to win the debate. The current value of that bias is a fixed external parameter. It is a constant of the problem not given to change. In contrast, stubbornness is an individual property. It results from external ingredients, which are susceptible to be modified during the debate. More precisely, giving some beliefs we determine the required stubbornness to oppose its associated bias in the debate outcome. The results shed a new and counter intuitive light on paradoxical outcomes of sensitive issues, which are discussed in the public. The case of the global warming issue is discussed.