Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content

Cultural Integration and Differentiation in Groups and Organizations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Perspectives on Culture and Agent-based Simulations

Part of the book series: Studies in the Philosophy of Sociality ((SIPS,volume 3))

Abstract

Experimental and field research has demonstrated a pervasive tendency toward pairwise conformity among individuals connected by positive social ties, and work using formal models has shown that opinions on connected influence networks should thus converge toward uniformity. Observing that diversity persists even in small scale groups and organizations, we investigate two empirically grounded mechanisms of social differentiation that may account for this persistence: First, actors may dislike or disrespect peers who diverge too much from their own views, and may change their opinions or behaviors to distance themselves further from those negative referents. Second, when surrounded by similar others, actors may try to maintain a sufficient sense of uniqueness by exploring new opinions or behaviors. Using computational experiments, we demonstrate that these two mechanisms lead to different patterns of polarization, radicalization, and factionalism and also investigate the conditions under which integration occurs. In closing, we discuss the implications for cultural dynamics in organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

eBook
USD 15.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Digital computers may fail to distinguish very small numbers from zero (Izquierdo and Polhill 2006), an error that would be consequential here in that it would erase the distinction between weak influence and no influence. To avoid such problems with floating point inaccuracy, we assign a minimum on positive weights at 10−5 and assign a maximum on negative weights at \(-1{0}^{-5}\). We thus conservatively ensure that weak ties are not mistakenly treated as null ties by the computer.

  2. 2.

    It is commonly believed that positive influence models invariably produce consensus on connected networks. Even as we add that the network must be strongly connected (i.e. paths allow influence to flow in both directions for all dyads in the population), this may not be strictly true in discrete time for certain network structures if the influence weight is high enough. The lack of convergence is obvious if influence weights (w ij, t ) are allowed to exceed 1. 0, of course, but even w ij, t  = 1 will yield stable limit cycles that prevent convergence for certain network structures. See Kitts and Trowbridge (2007) for an explanation of the general problem. This is not a danger here because influence weights in our model are strictly determined by similarity; that is, if w ij, t  = 1 then the agents’ opinions are already identical and no influence is possible. Thus stable limit cycles cannot prevent convergence.

  3. 3.

    We show below that the model may in this condition generate multiplex equilibria, where two extreme factions are accompanied by moderate subgroups. While interesting, these outcomes are very rare and vanish in the presence of noise.

References

  • Abelson, R. P.: Mathematical Models of the Distribution of Attitudes Under Controversy. In: Frederiksen, N., Gulliksen, H. (eds.) Contributions to Mathematical Psychology, 142–160. Rinehart Winston, New York (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E.: The social animal. Freeman Press, San Francisco (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R.: The dissemination of culture - A model with local convergence and global polarization. J Conflict Res. 41, 203–226 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldassarri, D., Bearman, P.: Dynamics of political polarization. Am Sociol Rev. 72, 784–811 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednar, J., A., Bramson, A., Jones-Rooy, A.,Page, S.: Emergent Cultural Signatures and Persistent Diversity: A Model of Conformity and Consistency. Ration Soc. 22, 407–444 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R. L.: A Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Reaching a Consensus Using DeGroot’s Method. J Am Stat Assoc. 76, 415–418 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berscheid, E.: Opinion Change and Communicator-Communicatee Similarity and Dissimilarity. J Pers Soc Psychol. 4, 670–680 (1966)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B.: The Social Self - on Being the Same and Different at the Same Time. Pers Soc Psychol B. 17, 475–482 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P.: Distinction: A social critique of the Judgment of Taste. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1984[1979])

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K.: A Theory of Group Stability. Am Sociol Rev. 56, 331–354 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, G. R., J. R. Harrison.: Come together? The Organizational Dynamics of Post-Merger Cultural Integration. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 10, 349–368 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centola, D., Gonzalez-Avella, J. C., Eguiluz, V. M.,Miguel, M. S.: Homophily, cultural drift and the co-evolution of cultural groups. J Conflict Res. 51, 905–929 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F.,Weisbuch, G.: Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Advances in Complex Systems. 3, 87–98 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGroot, M. H.: Reaching a Consensus. J Am Stat Assoc. 69, 118–121 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Sanctis, L., Galla, T.: Effects of noise and confidence thresholds in nominal and metric Axelrod dynamics of social influence. Phys Rev E. 79, 046108 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E.: The Division of Labor in Society. The Free Press, New York (1997 [1893])

    Google Scholar 

  • Durrett, R., Levin, S. A.: Can Stable Social Groups be Maintained by Homophilous Imitation alone? J Econ Behav Organ. 57, 267–286 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elias, N.: The Civilizing Process, Vol.I. The History of Manners. Blackwell, Oxford (1969[1939])

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L.: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Row, Petersen and Company, Evanston, White Plains (1957)

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L., Schachter, S., Back, K.: Social Pressures in Informal Groups. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  • Flache, A., Macy, M.: Local Convergence and Global Diversity: From Interpersonal to Social Influence. J Conflict Res. 55, 970–995 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flache, A., Mäs, M.: How to get the timing right? A computational model of how demographic faultlines undermine team performance and how the right timing of contacts can solve the problem. Comput Math Organ Theory. 14, 23–51 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • French, J. R. P.: A Formal Theory of Social Power. Psychol Rev. 63, 181–194 (1956)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedkin, N. E., Johnsen, E. C.: Social-Influence and Opinions. J Math Sociol. 15, 193–205 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harary, F.: A criterion for unanimity in French’s theory of social power. In: Cartwright, D. (eds.) Studies in social power, 168–182. Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor (1959)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. R., Carroll, G.: The Dynamics of Cultural Influence Networks. Comput Math Organ Theory. 8, 5–30 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. R., Carroll, G. R.: Culture and Demography in Organizations. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegselmann, R., Krause, U.: Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis, and Simulation. JASSS-J ARTIF SOC S. 5, (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F.: Attitudes and Cognitive Organization. In: Fishbein, M. (eds.) Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, 39–41. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, London, Sydney (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C.: The Human Group. Harcourt, Brace, and World, New York (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  • Imhoff, R., Erb, H. P.: What Motivates Nonconformity? Uniqueness Seeking Blocks Majority Influence. Pers Soc Psychol B. 35, 309–320 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izquierdo, L. R., Polhill, J. G.: Is Your Model Susceptible to Floating-Point Errors? JASSS-J ARTIF SOC S. 9 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A.: A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict. Admin Sci Quart. 40, 256–282 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A.: A Qualitative Analysis of Conflict Types and Dimensions of Organizational Groups. Admin Sci Quart. 42, 530–557 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., Bendersky, C.: Intragroup conflict in organizations: A contingency perspective on the conflict-outcome relationship. Res Organ Behav. 25, 187–242 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitts, J. A.: Mobilizing in Black Boxes: Social Networks and Participation in Social Movement Organizations. Mobilization. 5, 241–257 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitts, J.: Social Influence and the Emergence of Norms Amid Ties of Amity and Enmity. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory. 14, 407–422 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitts, J. A., Trowbridge, P. T.: Shape Up Or Ship Out: Social Networks, Social Influence, and Organizational Demography. Comput Math Organ Theory. 13, 333–353 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klemm, K., Eguiluz, V. M., Toral, R.,Miguel, M. S.: Global culture: A noise-induced transition in finite systems. Phys Rev E. 67, 045101(R) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, K.: Social Consensus and rational agnoiology. Synthese. 31, 141–160 (1975)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latane, B.: The Psychology of Social Impact. Am Psychol. 36, 343–356 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latane, B.: Pressures to uniformity and the evolution of cultural norms. In: Ilgen, D. R., Hulin, C. L. (eds.) Computational Modeling of Behavior in Organizations: The Third Scientific Discipline, 189–215. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Macy, M. W., Kitts, J., Flache, A.,Benard, S.: Polarization and Dynamic Networks. A Hopfield Model of Emergent Structure. In: Breiger, R., Carley, K., Pattison, P. (eds.) Dynamic Social Network Modeling and Analysis: Workshop Summary and Papers, 162–173. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, N. P.: Beyond individual differences: Social differentiation from first principles. Am Sociol Rev. 63, 309–330 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mark, N. P.: Culture and Competition: Homophily and Distancing Explanations for Cultural Niches. Am Sociol Rev. 68, 319–345 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäs, M., Flache, A.,Helbing, D.: Individualization as Driving Force of Clustering Phenomena in Humans. PLoS Computational Biology. 6, e1000959 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parisi, D., Cecconi, F.: Cultural Change in Spatial Environments. J Conflict Res. 47, 163–179 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pineda, M., Toral, R.,Hernandez-Garc?a, E.: Noisy continuous-opinion dynamics. Journal of Statistical Mechanics. P08001 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, E. E., Insko, C. A.: Cognitive consistency and performance in the autokinetic situation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 68, 184–192 (1964)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H., Ames, R. E.: Positive and Negative Referent Others as Sources of Influence: A Case of Helping. Sociometry. 40, 12–21 (1977)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shibanai, Y., Yasuno, S.,Ishiguro, I.: Effects of Global Information Feedback Diversity. J Conflict Res. 45, 80–96 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, C. R., Fromkin, H. L.: Uniqueness. The human Pursuit of Difference. Plenum Press, New York and London (1980)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., Turner, J. C.: The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. In: Worchel, S., Austin, W. G. (eds.) Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 7–24. Nelson-Hall Publishers, Chicago (1986)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research of Andreas Flache and Michael Mäs has been supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, NWO (VIDI Grant 452-04-351). James Kitts acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (BCS-0433086 and IIS-0433637).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Mäs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mäs, M., Flache, A., Kitts, J.A. (2014). Cultural Integration and Differentiation in Groups and Organizations. In: Dignum, V., Dignum, F. (eds) Perspectives on Culture and Agent-based Simulations. Studies in the Philosophy of Sociality, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01952-9_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics