Minority rules: scientists discover tipping point for the spread of ideas
July 26, 2011
Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society.
The scientists developed computer models of various types of social networks. One of the networks had each person connect to every other person in the network. The second model included certain individuals who were connected to a large number of people, making them opinion hubs or leaders.
The final model gave every person in the model roughly the same number of connections. The initial state of each of the models was a sea of traditional-view holders. Each of these individuals held a view, but were also, importantly, open minded to other views.
Once the networks were built, the scientists then “sprinkled” in some true believers throughout each of the networks.
“As agents of change start to convince more and more people, the situation begins to change,” Sreenivasan said. “People begin to question their own views at first and then completely adopt the new view to spread it even further. If the true believers just influenced their neighbors, that wouldn’t change anything within the larger system, as we saw with percentages less than 10.
“When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority,” said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski. “Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame.
The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. “There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion,” said Associate Professor of Physics and co-author of the paper Gyorgy Korniss. “Some examples might be the need to quickly convince a town to move before a hurricane or spread new information on the prevention of disease in a rural village.”
The researchers are now looking for partners within the social sciences and other fields to compare their computational models to historical examples. They are also looking to study how the percentage might change when input into a model where the society is polarized. Instead of simply holding one traditional view, the society would instead hold two opposing viewpoints. An example of this polarization would be Democrat versus Republican.
Ref.: J. Xie, et al., Szymanski. Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities, Physical Review E, 2011; 84 (1) [DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.84.011130]
Comments (7)
by Brian H
Lots of problems with this study, but it was not intended to handle two sets of unchangeable opinion holders. That will come in the next “polarized” simulation.
by dougw659
Wow, I’m once again amazed at how even pretty well educated members of the media will distort facts to ‘sell’ their wares. The very first paragraph of this article is a complete misrepresnettaion of the science it describes. From what I read, the model that is described contains ONLY ONE set of ‘true believers’, which is a completely non-realistic model. Perhaps what we will find is that a secondary component of spreading the beliefs of the ‘unshakeable’10% is the elimination of all ‘true believers’ with opposing opinions. The fact is that seems to not have been studied. So, please, remember that this isn’t CNN or Fox, you don’t have huge advertising quotas to hit, and just print what the science really means, not hyperbola or sexy ‘grabber’ headlines or opening paragraphs. We come to this site just to avoid that kind of nonsense…..
by frankzappa
I agree with this man. End shock headline tyranny!
by Unshakable Beliefs, Herd Psychology, and the Spread of Ideas Begins at the 10% Threshold, says Research
[...] KurzweilAI.net AKPC_IDS += "2480,";Popularity: unranked [?] [...]
by Feynmaniac
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_monkey_effect
by geekette
Living in Spin
These are examples of a “belief” made by a “majority”… that is, a large organization such as a newspaper or govt, where they are a majority only because their voice is loud and they get AIR TIME…
Newly released chart shows 133 acres burned on Los Alamos lab property — Officials had insisted there were only two tiny fires
or
Japan Scientists Say Sea Radiation Govt Tests May Miss Seafood Threat
These are actual headlines, the first is from the Las Conchas newspaper in New Mexico, the second from Bloomberg. Who is the minority here? The scientists? The citizens?
by geekette
i distinguish between “belief” and scientific “fact”. things we measure are not the same as belief. like… “there’s no such thing as global warming” or “the sun revolves around the earth”? or do you mean like advertising, where drug companies show us pictures of fabulous golfers enjoying life and then warn us the drug can also cause blindness or problems breathing?
a famous belief in Japan right now is that harmful levels of radiation are not harmful. oh but wait, there are all sorts of people who are measuring for themselves.
i have worked on multi-agent truth maintenance for 12 years. in fact there is a common sense of belief that involves emotion. my truth maintenance system keeps belief status according to emotional state and personality as well as other logical considerations. there’s more to it than just this simple study. even in software agents.