Abstract
We use recent results of Cattuto et al. (PLoS ONE, 5(7):e11596, 2010) on face-to-face contact durations to try to answer the question: why do people engage in face-to-face discussions? In particular we focus on behavior of scientists in academic conferences. We show evidence that macroscopic measured data are compatible with two different micro-founded models of social interaction. We find that the first model, in which discussions are performed with the aim of introducing oneself (networking), explains the data when the group exhibits few well reputed scientists. On the contrary, when the reputation hierarchy is not strong, a model where agents’ encounters are aimed at exchanging opinions explains the data better.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
An agent engaged in a discussion will be defined to be occupied, while an agent waiting for an available partner or proposing a conversation will be defined to be free.
References
Axelrod R (1997) The dissemination of culture: a model with local convergence and global polarization. J Confl Resolut 41(2):203
Blondel V, Krings G, Thomas I (2010) Regions and borders of mobile telephony in Belgium and in the Brussels metropolitan zone. Brussels Studies 42(4)
Blondel V (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech 2008:P10008
Cattuto C et al. (2010) Dynamics of person-to-person interactions from distributed RFID sensor networks. PLoS ONE 5(7):e11596
Chamberlin EH (1948) An experimental imperfect market. J Polit Econ 56:95
Deffuant G et al. (2000) Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Adv Complex Syst 3:87–98
Galam S (1986) Majority rule, hierarchical structures and democratic totalitarism: a statistical approach. J Math Psychol 30:426
Gerard HG, Orive R (1987) The dynamics of opinion formation. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 20:171
Krings G et al (2009) Urban gravity: a model for inter-city telecommunication flows. Journal of Statistical Mechanics L07003. doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2009/07/L07003
Isella L et al. (2011) What’s in a crowd? Analysis of face-to-face behavioral networks. J Theor Biol 271:166
Lambiotte R et al. (2008) Geographical dispersal of mobile communication networks. Physica A 387:5317–5325
Schelling TC (1971) Dynamic models of segregation. J Math Sociol 1:143
van Dijk SJ, van Winden F (2006) On the dynamics of social ties structures in groups. J Pers Soc Psychol 43(1):78
Zhao K et al. (2011) Social network dynamics of face to face interactions. Phys Rev E 83:056109
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Righi, S., Carletti, T. (2013). Face-to-Face Discussions: Networking or Opinions Exchange?. In: Gilbert, T., Kirkilionis, M., Nicolis, G. (eds) Proceedings of the European Conference on Complex Systems 2012. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00395-5_99
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00395-5_99
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-00394-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-00395-5
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)