Matteo Michelini, Javier Osorio, Wybo Houkes, Dunja Šešelja, Christian Straßer
{"title":"科学分歧和证据的诊断性:过多的数据如何导致两极分化","authors":"Matteo Michelini, Javier Osorio, Wybo Houkes, Dunja Šešelja, Christian Straßer","doi":"10.18564/jasss.5113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Scienti fi c disagreements sometimes persist even if scientists fully share results of their research. In this paper we develop an agent-based model to study the impact of diverging diagnostic values scientists may assign to the evidence, given their di ff erent background assumptions, on the emergence of polarization in the scienti fi c community. Scientists are represented as Bayesian updaters for whom the diagnosticity of evidence is given by the Bayes factor. Our results suggest that an initial disagreement on the diagnostic value of evidence can, but does not necessarily, lead to polarization, depending on the sample size of the performed studies and thecon fi denceintervalwithinwhichscientistssharetheiropinions. Inparticular,themoredatascientistsshare, the more likely it is that the community will end up polarized.","PeriodicalId":51498,"journal":{"name":"Jasss-The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientific Disagreements and the Diagnosticity of Evidence: How Too Much Data May Lead to Polarization\",\"authors\":\"Matteo Michelini, Javier Osorio, Wybo Houkes, Dunja Šešelja, Christian Straßer\",\"doi\":\"10.18564/jasss.5113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": Scienti fi c disagreements sometimes persist even if scientists fully share results of their research. In this paper we develop an agent-based model to study the impact of diverging diagnostic values scientists may assign to the evidence, given their di ff erent background assumptions, on the emergence of polarization in the scienti fi c community. Scientists are represented as Bayesian updaters for whom the diagnosticity of evidence is given by the Bayes factor. Our results suggest that an initial disagreement on the diagnostic value of evidence can, but does not necessarily, lead to polarization, depending on the sample size of the performed studies and thecon fi denceintervalwithinwhichscientistssharetheiropinions. Inparticular,themoredatascientistsshare, the more likely it is that the community will end up polarized.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jasss-The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jasss-The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.5113\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jasss-The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.5113","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Scientific Disagreements and the Diagnosticity of Evidence: How Too Much Data May Lead to Polarization
: Scienti fi c disagreements sometimes persist even if scientists fully share results of their research. In this paper we develop an agent-based model to study the impact of diverging diagnostic values scientists may assign to the evidence, given their di ff erent background assumptions, on the emergence of polarization in the scienti fi c community. Scientists are represented as Bayesian updaters for whom the diagnosticity of evidence is given by the Bayes factor. Our results suggest that an initial disagreement on the diagnostic value of evidence can, but does not necessarily, lead to polarization, depending on the sample size of the performed studies and thecon fi denceintervalwithinwhichscientistssharetheiropinions. Inparticular,themoredatascientistsshare, the more likely it is that the community will end up polarized.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation is an interdisciplinary journal for the exploration and understanding of social processes by means of computer simulation. Since its first issue in 1998, it has been a world-wide leading reference for readers interested in social simulation and the application of computer simulation in the social sciences. Original research papers and critical reviews on all aspects of social simulation and agent societies that fall within the journal"s objective to further the exploration and understanding of social processes by means of computer simulation are welcome.