The role of emotion on communication and attitude dynamics: an - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION The role of emotion on communication and attitude dynamics: an agent-based approach Kei-Léo Brousmiche 1 , 3 Jean-Daniel Kant 2 Nicolas Sabouret 2 Stephane Fournier 3 François Prenot-Guinard 3 1 LIP6 - Université Pierre & Marie Curie, Paris, France 2 LIMSI-CNRS - Université Paris-Sud, Orsay, France 3 Airbus Defense & Space, Elancourt, France WCSS, Sao Paulo, november 2014 kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 1

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Definitions Attitude “a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor” [Eagly and Chaiken, 1993] Simple version: How much do I like something, or not. [Me, 2014] Belief Acceptation of a factual information [Oxford Dictionary] kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 2

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Context: Stabilization Operations Needs for new systems Population-centric training systems Perception-attitude-behaviour dynamics toward Forces Social simulation Attitude dynamics Agent-based modelling kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 3

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Objectives Model of attitude dynamics based on Psychological theories Representation of beliefs Interest of information Generic Model of communication Belief exchange Social network Inter-ethnic conflicts Model social groups kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 4

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Classical Attitude Models in Social Simulation Simple models e.g binary, discrete or real values [Nowak et al., 1990] ✪ Do not consider the construction mechanism of the attitude [Urbig and Malitz, 2007] ✦ Sum of the evaluations of the object’s features ✪ Bounded-confidence model ⇒ attitude-beliefs connections are lost ✪ Agents shouldn’t have unlimited memory kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 5

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION An Attitude Models in Psychology Attitude as object-evaluation associations [Fazio, 2007] ✦ Links between attitude and beliefs ✦ Limited memory with varying accessibilies kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 6

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Communication What to communicate? Attitude itself [Xia et al., 2010, Castellano et al., 2009] Or part of [Urbig and Malitz, 2007] ✪ no psychological foundation ✌ daily communication: conversational narratives > 40 % [Eggins and Slade, 1997] ✇ Belief exchange How? ✇ Based on the narrative interest of the belief [Dimulescu and Dessalles, 2009] To whom? Small-world [Milgram, 1967] Social groups kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 7

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION General Principle kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 8

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Agent Cognition kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 9

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Cognition Revision Acquire beliefs 1 Revise attitudes 2 Information’s interest : Dessalles’ Simplicity Theory Communicate beliefs 3 [Dimulescu and Dessalles, 2009] kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 10

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Information’s Interest Interest of Retention: information’s accessibility in memory Narration: communication probability Simplicity Theory [Dimulescu and Dessalles, 2009] INT ( a ) = 2 E ( a )+ S ( a ) E ( a ) : Emotional response S ( a ) : Generated surprise kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 11

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Simplicity Theory: Emotional Response � � 1 + | stimulus | Weber-Fechner’s law of the stimulus: E ( a ) = log ξ stimulus = payoff of the action’s impact ξ sensibility parameter kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 12

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Simplicity Theory: Surprise S = U raw − U perso U raw raw unexpectedness U perso personal unexpectedness on multiple dimensions: U time , U social , U geo U x = C x w − C x d x the dimension C x w complexity of generation C x d complexity of description kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 13

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Simplicity Theory: Example of Time Complexity Raw unexpectedness C time = log ( date ( a ) − date ( a old )) ≈ rarity w C time = log ( t − date ( a )) ≈ recency d � � ✇ U time date ( a ) − date ( a old ) raw ( a ) = log t − date ( a ) Personal Unexpectedness : � � date ( a ) − date ( a perso ) ✇ U time perso ( a ) = log t − date ( a ) Surprise ( U time raw ( a ) − U time perso ( a ) ): � � ✇ S time ( a ) = log date ( a ) − date ( a old ) date ( a ) − date ( a perso ) kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 14

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Attitude construction kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 15

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Analysis of narrative interest components’ impacts 100 agents ; repeated actions ; introduction of α to weight the surprise factor → Boosting effect and habituation effect kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 16

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION The impact of social groups 100 agents ; 3 social groups ; 3 phases of repeated actions kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 17

I NTRODUCTION R ELATED W ORKS M ODEL E XPERIMENTS C ONCLUSION Conclusion An attitude dynamics model based on socio-psychological theories beliefs narrative communication emotion Futur works real case study calibration kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 18

References I Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., and Loreto, V. (2009). Statistical physics of social dynamics. Reviews of modern physics , 81(2):591. Dimulescu, A. and Dessalles, J.-L. (2009). Understanding narrative interest: Some evidence on the role of unexpectedness. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , pages 1734–1739. Eagly, A. H. and Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Eggins, S. and Slade, D. (1997). Analysing casual conversation . Equinox Publishing Ltd. Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength. Social Cognition , 25(5):603. kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 19

References II Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology today , 2(1):60–67. Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., and Latane, B. (1990). From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. Psychological Review , 97(3):362. Urbig, D. and Malitz, R. (2007). Drifting to more extreme but balanced attitudes: Multidimensional attitudes and selective exposure. ESSA, Toulouse . Xia, H., Wang, H., and Xuan, Z. (2010). Opinion dynamics: Disciplinary origins, recent developments, and a view on future trends. kei-leo.brousmiche@lip6.fr LIP6, Airbus D&S, LIMSI 20