Analytical insights from a model of opinion formation based on Persuasive Argument Theory

TL;DR

This paper introduces an analytical opinion formation model based on Persuasive Argument Theory, revealing how group dynamics like consensus and polarization emerge depending on argument exchange and homophily.

Contribution

It is the first to analytically model opinion dynamics grounded in Persuasive Argument Theory, highlighting the conditions for consensus and bipolarization.

Findings

Bipolarization occurs only with homophily.

The model exhibits quasi-consensus and bipolarization.

Homophily influences opinion polarization.

Abstract

In recent years, numerous mathematical models of opinion formation have been developed, incorporating diverse interaction mechanisms such as imitation and majority rule. However, limited attention has been given to models grounded in persuasive arguments theory (PAT), which describes how individuals may alter their opinions through the exchange of arguments during discussions. Moreover, analytical investigations of PAT-based models remain sparse. In this study, we propose an analytical model rooted in PAT, demonstrating that a group of agents can exhibit two distinct collective dynamics: quasi-consensus and bipolarization. Specifically, we explore various scenarios characterized by the number of arguments and the degree of homophily, revealing that bipolarization arises within this framework only in the presence of homophily.