Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society. The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals.
“When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority,” said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. “Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame.”
As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. “In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks.”
The findings were published in the July 22, […]
In reading the article, this is a study from 2011, based on computer models that seem to have in common the same pattern of organization as an infection model. It’s based on the assumption that people who have an open mind to change meet people who are close-minded ‘evangelists’ with a certain opinion that won’t change. When those two kinds of people interact, the model’s assumptions are that if the open-minded people meet two close-minded people in a row, the open-minded person will change their mind. IMHO this is a flawed assumption that leads to the results they describe, that 10% of the population holding a minority opinion can flip a whole population to its thinking. Obviously this is not the case in real life, so it’s clear the scientists’ assumptions are flawed.
Unfortunately, I think we see this concept in play by the current lack of gun regulation in the US. The small percentage of Americans who unshakeably agree with the NRA’s fringe beliefs have tipped the politicians and society to believe that those positions are actually acceptable for the US, and we have adopted their beliefs. It’s interesting and necessary to think about how to combat the negative proof of this theory with a positive reaction. Is the critical mass needed to topple that belief the same? Compassionate and life affirming positions will hopefully win out.