Beyond Social Contagion: Associative Diffusion and the Emergence of Cultural Variation

Abstract

Network models of diffusion predominantly think about cultural variation as a product of social contagion. But culture does not spread like a virus. We propose an alternative explanation we call associative diffusion. Drawing on two insights from research in cognition-that meaning inheres in cognitive associations between concepts, and that perceived associations constrain people's actions-we introduce a model in which, rather than beliefs or behaviors, the things being transmitted between individuals are perceptions about what beliefs or behaviors are compatible with one another. Conventional contagion models require the assumption that networks are segregated to explain cultural variation. We show, in contrast, that the endogenous emergence of cultural differentiation can be entirely attributable to social cognition and does not require a segregated network or a preexisting division into groups. Moreover, we show that prevailing assumptions about the effects of network topology do not hold when diffusion is associative.

Peer Network Processes in Adolescents' Health Lifestyles

“…First, Goldberg and Stein (2018) claim that "rather than [individual] beliefs and behaviors, the things being transmitted between individuals are perceptions about what beliefs or behaviors are compatible with one another" (2018: 897). This framework consists of a twostage process not dissimilar from Strang and Soule: (1) interpreting others' clusters of behaviors, and (2) evaluating whether and how to enact those clusters for oneself.…”

“…Strang and Soule (1998) contend that diffusion often entails a process of "interpreted abstraction" whereby individuals perceive and interpret their peers' behaviors, rather than simply adopting the specific behaviors of their peers. Goldberg and Stein (2018) show one process by which this abstraction could occur; they suggest that peer influence arises on the basis of "associative diffusion," which is the assessments of similarity between beliefs and behaviors, rather than influence operating on each of those beliefs/behaviors alone. Lewis and Kaufman (2018) demonstrate that bundles of cultural tastes (rather than individual artist/product preferences) similarly provide a means for homophilous selection.…”

What can cognitive neuroscience do for cultural sociology?

“…For instance, binding is involved in the generation of implicit (or explicit) associations between previously unrelated cultural elements (Goldberg and Stein, 2017;Shepherd, 2011); the link between cognitive representations of objects, events, properties, and specific affective values (e.g. linking "men" and "powerful" or "success" and "good" (Robinson et al ., 2006)); the integration of singular or concrete representations (e.g.…”

“…This is the difference between what Lakoff (2009) refers to as obligatory (characteristic of perceptual bindings such as an apple's shape and color specifications) and nonce bindings (put together on the fly and determined by characteristics of context). This approach suggests that some lines of research in cultural sociology may be on the right track in conceptualizing culture as an individual's repertoire (i.e., procedural memory) for forming coherent representations as situations arise rather than storing them ready-made (Lizardo and Strand, 2010;Martin, 2010), and thinking of cultural change as the diffusion of metaphors, objects, and dispositions reflecting novel bindings between previously unassociated concepts and practices (Goldberg and Stein, 2017).…”

New Methods for the Steady-State Analysis of Complex Agent-Based Models

“…Each model typically describes opinion change through a fixed strategy, where an agent might update their beliefs to more accurate values [16][17][18], or perhaps might seek conformity by following either the majority around them [13], or by copying the mean opinion [4]. The effects of social influence might vary with the distance between one's own opinion and the advocated one [19][20][21], on the details of how the new information is presented [22] or even to meta-information [23][24][25]. Opinion dynamics models often also take into account the structure of the social networks where agents are embedded.…”