This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Buskens, V. Articles by Weesie, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Consent or Conflict: Coevolution of Coordination and Networks

Department of Sociology /Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology (ICS), Utrecht University, v.buskens{at}uu.nl

Rense Corten

Department of Sociology /Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology (ICS), Utrecht University

Jeroen Weesie

Department of Sociology /Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology (ICS), Utrecht University

Societies are sometimes divided into groups that behave in different ways or have strongly opposing opinions. At other times, everyone seems to behave according to similar principles and opinions. It is likely that individual decisions on behavior or opinions are affected by social networks through influence and selection processes. However, the outcomes are not necessarily optimal for the society as a whole. Two types of problems might arise: (a) polarization of the society into two camps that do not reach consensus, possibly leading to conflict; (b) actors choosing suboptimal behavior, because changing behavior is too risky if done unilaterally. Simulations show that if a society is rather segregated initially, there exists a heightened probability that this situation will worsen. The effect of network density is twofold. First, density has a positive effect on reaching a uniform opinion and, therefore, decreases the likelihood of polarization. Second, density increases the likelihood that actors do not change their behavior, worsening the inefficiency of already suboptimal initial situations.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 45, No. 2, 205-222 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343307087177


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Esteban and G. Schneider Polarization and Conflict: Theoretical and Empirical Issues Journal of Peace Research, March 1, 2008; 45(2): 131 - 141. [Abstract] [PDF]