Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Volume 2011, Article ID 765640, 19 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/765640
Research Article

Friendship Dynamics: Modelling Social Relationships through a Fuzzy Agent-Based Simulation

1Grupo de Investigación en Agentes Software: Ingeniería y Aplicaciones (GRASIA), Departamento de Ingeniería del Software e Inteligencia Artificial, Universidad Complutense Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
2Centre for Research in Social Simulation (CRESS), Department of Sociology, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XH, UK

Received 11 March 2011; Accepted 9 June 2011

Academic Editor: Guang Zhang

Copyright © 2011 Samer Hassan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. P. F. Lazarsfeld and R. K. Merton, “Friendship as a social process: a substantive and methodological analysis,” in Freedom and Control in Modern Society, M. Berger and T. Abel, Eds., Van Nostrand, New York, NY, USA, 1954. View at Google Scholar
  2. P. S. Bearman, J. Moody, and K. Stovel, “Chains of affection: the structure of adolescent romantic and sexual networks,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 44–91, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. P. S. Bearman and H. Brückner, “Promising the future: virginity pledges and first intercourse,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 859–912, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. J. O. G. Billy, K. L. Brewster, and W. R. Grady, “Contextual effects on the sexual behavior of adolescent women,” Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 387–404, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  5. K. L. Brewster, “Neighborhood context and the transition to sexual activity among young black women,” Demography, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 603–614, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. Y. Åberg, “The contagiousness of divorce,” in The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology, P. Hedström and P. S. Bearman, Eds., pp. 342–364, Oxford University Press, Hampshire, UK, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  7. G. Deffuant, F. Amblard, G. Weisbuch, and T. Faure, “How can extremism prevail? a study based on the relative agreement interaction model,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5, no. 4, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  8. H. Petter and G. Andreas, “Modelling the dynamics of youth subcultures,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 3, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  9. E. Marchione, M. Salgado, and N. Gilbert, ““What did you say?” Emergent communication in a multi-agent spatial configuration,” Advances in Complex Systems, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 469–482, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. R. Axelrod, “An evolutionary approach to norms,” The American Political Science Review, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 1095–1111, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  11. R. Axelrod, “The dissemination of culture: a model with local convergence and global polarization,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 203–226, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. C. A. Caldwell and A. E. Millen, “Studying cumulative cultural evolution in the laboratory,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 363, no. 1509, pp. 3529–3539, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. M. Epstein, “Modeling civil violence: an agent-based computational approach,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 7243–7250, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. H. Chang and J. E. Harrington, “Discovery and diffusion of knowledge in an endogenous social network,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 110, no. 4, pp. 937–976, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. J. Smithson and J. Verkuilen, Fuzzy Set Theory: Applications in the Social Sciences, Sage Publications, 1st edition, 2006.
  16. M. Seif El-Nasr, J. Yen, and T. R. Ioerger, “FLAME—fuzzy logic adaptive model of emotions,” Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 219–257, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. C. A. Cioffi-Revilla, “Fuzzy sets and models of international relations,” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 129–159, 1981. View at Google Scholar
  18. J. G. Epstein, M. Mohring, and K. G. Troitzsch, “Fuzzy-logical rules in a multi-agent system,” in SimSocVI Workshop, p. 25, Groningen, The Netherlands, 2003.
  19. J. M. Epstein and R. Axtell, Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, USA; The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1996.
  20. S. Hassan, L. Antunes, and J. Pavón, “Mentat: a data-driven agent-based simulation of social values evolution,” in Multi-Agent-Based Simulation X, vol. 5683 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 135–146, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  21. M. J. North, N. T. Collier, and J. R. Vos, “Experiences creating three implementations of the Repast agent modeling toolkit,” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 16, pp. 1–25, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  22. J. Pavón, M. Arroyo, S. Hassan, and C. Sansores, “Agent-based modelling and simulation for the analysis of social patterns,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1039–1048, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. Inglehart, University Consortium for Political, I., Research, S.: World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys 1981–1984, 1990–1993, and 1995–1997. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, 2000.
  24. S. Hassan, L. Antunes, and M. Arroyo, “Deepening the demographic mechanisms in a data-driven social simulation of moral values evolution,” in Multi-Agent-Based Simulation IX, vol. 5269 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 46–59, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  25. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Computation, vol. 8, pp. 338–353, 1965. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  26. L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems. Selected Papers by Lotfi A. Zadeh, vol. 6 of Advances in Fuzzy Systems—Applications and Theory, World Scientific, River Edge, NJ, USA, 1996. View at Zentralblatt MATH
  27. A. P. Norris and R. Inglehart, Sacred and Secular, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2004.
  28. A. Katz, M. vom Hau, and J. Mahoney, “Explaining the great reversal in Spanish America: fuzzy-set analysis versus regression analysis,” Sociological Methods & Research, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 539–573, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. B. Lomborg, “Nucleus and shield: the evolution of social structure in the iterated prisoner's dilemma,” American Sociological Review, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 278–307, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. J. E. West and B. Linster, “The evolution of fuzzy rules as strategies in two-player games,” Southern Economic Journal, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 705–717, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. J. Carbó, J. M. Molina, and J. Dávila, “Fuzzy referral based cooperation in social networks of agents,” AI Communications, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  32. H. Fort and N. Perez, “The fate of spatial dilemmas with different fuzzy measures of success,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 8, no. 3, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  33. H. Situngkir, “The ribbon of love: fuzzy-ruled agents in artificial society,” Tech. Rep. BFI Working Paper Series, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  34. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–28, 1978. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  35. S. Hassan, L. Garmendia, and J. Pavón, “Introducing uncertainty into social simulation: using fuzzy logic for agent-based modelling,” Reasoning-Based Intelligent Systems, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 118–124, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  36. L. A. Zadeh, “Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings,” Information Science, vol. 3, pp. 177–200, 1971. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  37. L. Hamill and N. Gilbert, “Social circles: a simple structure for agent-based social network models,” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 3, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  38. L. Hamill, Communications, travel and social networks since 1840: a study using agent-based models, Ph.D. thesis, University of Surrey, Surrey, UK, 2010.
  39. L. Valverde, “On the structure of F-Indistinguishability operators,” Tech. Rep., Computer Science Division, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, Calif, USA, September 1984. View at Google Scholar
  40. B. Schweizer and A. Sklar, Probabilistic Metric Spaces, Dover Publications, New York, NY, USA, 2005.
  41. R. R. Yager, “Families of OWA operators,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 125–148, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  42. M. McPherson, L. Smith-Lovin, and J. M. Cook, “Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks,” Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 27, pp. 415–444, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. L. M. Verbrugge, “The structure of adult friendship choices,” Social Forces, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 576–597, 1977. View at Google Scholar
  44. D. B. Kandel, “Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships,” The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 427–436, 1978. View at Google Scholar
  45. K. Yamaguchi, “Homophily and social distance in the choice of multiple friends: an analysis based on conditionally symmetric Log-Bilinear association model,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 85, no. 410, pp. 356–366, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  46. S. L. Feld, “Social structural determinants of similarity among associates,” American Sociological Review, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 797–801, 1982. View at Google Scholar
  47. R. R. Huckfeldt, “Social contexts, social networks, and urban neighborhoods: environmental constraints on friendship choice ( Detroit),” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 651–669, 1983. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. P. Blanchard, R. L. Devaney, and G. R. Hall, Differential Equations, Brooks Cole, 2nd edition, 2002.
  49. R. J. Mislevy, “Bayes modal estimation in item response models,” Psychometrika, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 177–195, 1986. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  50. S. K. Balasubramanian and W. A. Kamakura, “Measuring consumer attitudes toward the marketplace with tailored interviews,” Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 311–326, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  51. B. Wellman, R. Y. L. Wong, D. Tindall, and N. Nazer, “A decade of network change: turnover, persistence and stability in personal communities,” Social Networks, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 27–50, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. P. Csermely, Weak Links: Stabilizers of Complex Systems from Proteins to Social Networks, Springer, 1 edition, 2006.