Contrarian effect in opinion forming: Insights from Greta Thunberg phenomenon

Iacomini, Elisa; Vellucci, Pierluigi

doi:10.1080/0022250x.2021.1981310

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This means that these stakeholders are steadily present on Twitter, voicing their opinion and also they are able to capture the attention and the consensus of the people of Twitter. These results are in contrast with others found for public opinion formation on wind energy (Mastroeni et al ., n.d.) and climate issues (Iacomini and Vellucci, 2021). For example, on the subject of wind energy, companies and institutional organisations seem to exert a much lower influence (Mastroeni et al ., n.d.) whereas, on the subject of climate change, twitterers seem to be polarised around a small number of different opinions (Iacomini and Vellucci, 2021).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twitter and the circular economy: examining the public discourse

Mastroeni

Naldi

Vellucci

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThough the circular economy (CE) is a current buzzword, this still lacks a precise definition. In the absence of a clear notion of what that term includes, actions taken by the government and companies may not be well informed. In particular, those actions need to consider what people mean when people talk about the CE, either to refocus people's decisions or to undertake a more effective communications strategy.Design/methodology/approachSince people voice people's opinions mainly through social media nowadays, special attention has to be paid to discussions on those media. In this paper, the authors focus on Twitter as a popular social platform to deliver one's thoughts quickly and fast. The authors' research aim is to get the perceptions of people about the CE. After collecting more than 100,000 tweets over 16 weeks, the authors analyse those tweets to understand the public discussion about the CE. The authors conduct a frequency analysis of the most recurring words, including the words' association with other words in the same context and categorise them into a set of topics.FindingsThe authors show that the discussion focuses on the usage of resources and materials that heavily endanger sustainability, i.e. carbon and plastic and the harmful habit of wasting. On the other hand, the two most common good practices associated with the CE and sustainability emerge as recycling and reuse (the latter being mentioned far less). Also, the business side of the CE appears to be relevant.Research limitations/implicationsThe outcome of this analysis can drive suitable communication strategies by which companies and governments interested in the development of the CE can understand what is actually discussed on social media and call for the attention.Originality/valueThis paper addresses the lack of a standard definition the authors highlighted in the Introduction. The results confirm that people understand CE by looking both at CE's constituent activities and CE's expected consequences, namely the reduction of waste, the transition to a green economy free of plastic and other pollutants and the improvement of the world climate.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twitter and the circular economy: examining the public discourse

Mastroeni

Naldi

Vellucci

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3. Scale-free networks [69,70] can be modified to reflect oneto-many and one-way relationships such as those between internet celebrities/social media influencers and their fans. Future researchers may be interested in adding a "contrarian" factor to scale-free networks to consider the effects of antimainstream thinking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4) [62]. Adopters are now categorized as innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, or laggards [69], each with different personality traits. Early adopters have positive attitudes toward change, new ideas, and innovative products.…”

Section: E Diffusion Of Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiagent Diffusion and Opinion Dynamics Model Interaction Effects on Controversial Products

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When controversial products are introduced, effective promotion efforts and eventual public acceptance require consideration of multiple factors such as existing social network structures, numbers of pioneers and their locations, and appropriate methods for product information diffusion. These factors have been the focus of marketing, investment and other studies for many years, most recently in computer information science. Researchers are especially motivated to understand diffusion processes for new technologies and controversial products within and across social networks. While many product diffusion simulation models have been proposed, most suffer from assumptions of unchanging internal agent attitudes toward products, no opinion exchanges between agents, and non-significant relationships between agent internal opinion attitudes and diffusion thresholds. In this paper we propose an opinion dynamics model that assumes both agent interaction and changes in agent attitudes over time. Social psychology theory is used to explain interactions between opinion and diffusion dynamics, with changing agent attitudes and behaviors affected by interpersonal relationship factors. Simulations were used to study dynamic diffusion processes involving controversial products (e.g., vaccines and genetically modified foods) in different social networks. Results indicate that the proposed model accurately reflects several kinds of social phenomena, including pioneer influences, rural marketing strategies, and the influence of social network structure. This effort to identify instances of product diffusion under various social conditions is offered in support of research in communication dynamics and social media-centered marketing strategies.

show abstract

“…A good part of the work addresses the issue from the perspective of the dynamics of opinion within sociophysics [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Most related papers consider binary variables [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 ], with a few having three discrete opinions [ 43 , 44 ]. Among the numerous models is the Galam model, which has been deployed in a multi-dimensional space of parameters to study the competition between discrete opinions [ 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unanimity, Coexistence, and Rigidity: Three Sides of Polarization

Galam

2023

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political polarization is perceived as a threat to democracies. Using the Galam model of opinion dynamics deployed in a five-dimensional parameter space, I show that polarization is the byproduct of an essential hallmark of a vibrant democratic society, namely open and informal discussions among agents. Indeed, within a homogeneous social community with floaters, the dynamics lead gradually toward unanimity (zero entropy). Polarization can eventually appear as the juxtaposition of non-mixing social groups sharing different prejudices about the issue at stake. On the other hand, the inclusion of contrarian agents produces a polarization within a community that mixes when their proportion x is beyond a critical value xc=16≈0.167 for discussing groups of size three and four. Similarly, the presence of stubborn agents also produces a polarization of a community that mixes when the proportion of stubborn agents is greater than some critical value. For equal proportions of stubborn agents a along each opinion, ac=29≈0.22 for group size four against ac=14=0.25 for group size three. However, the evaluation of the proportion of individual opinion shifts at the attractor 12 and indicates that the polarization produced by contrarians is fluid with a good deal of agents who keep shifting between the two opposed blocks (high entropy). That favors a coexistence of opposite opinions in a divided community. In contrast, the polarization created by stubborn agents is found to be frozen with very few individuals shifting opinion between the two opinions (low entropy). That yields a basis for the emergence of hate between the frozen opposed blocks.

show abstract

Contrarian effect in opinion forming: Insights from Greta Thunberg phenomenon

Cited by 9 publications

References 41 publications

Twitter and the circular economy: examining the public discourse

Twitter and the circular economy: examining the public discourse

Multiagent Diffusion and Opinion Dynamics Model Interaction Effects on Controversial Products

Unanimity, Coexistence, and Rigidity: Three Sides of Polarization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About