Are there universal laws of life and can we find them? Is there a physics of society, of ecology, of evolution? Join us for six episodes of thought-provoking insights on the physics of life and its profound implications on our understanding of the universe. In this season of the Santa Fe Institute’s Complexity podcast’s relaunch, we talk to researchers who have been exploring these questions and more through the lens of complexity science. Subscribe now and be part of the exploration!
https://complexity.simplecast.com
episode 43: Vicky Yang & Henrik Olsson on Political Polling & Polarization: How We Make Decisions & Identities
Whether you live in the USA or have just been watching the circus from afar, chances are that you agree: “polarization” dominates descriptions of the social landscape. Judging from the news alone, one might think the States have never been so painfully divided…yet nuanced public polls, and new behavioral models, suggest another narrative: the United States is largely moderate, and people have much more in common with each other than they think. There’s no denying our predicament: cognitive biases lead us to “out-group” one another even when we might be allies, and the game of politics drives a two-party system into ever-more-intense division, until something has to give. But the same evidence from social science offers hope, that we might find a way to harness our collective thinking processes for the sake of everyone and row together toward a future big enough to hold our disagreements.
Welcome to COMPLEXITY, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute. I’m your host, Michael Garfield, and every other week we’ll bring you with us for far-ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.
In this episode we talk to SFI External Professor Henrik Olsson and SFI Complexity Postdoctoral Fellow, Omidyar Fellow, and Baird Hurst Scholar Vicky C. Yang about their work on social cognition and political identity. In a conversation that couldn’t be more timely, we ask: How can we leverage an understanding of networks for better political polling and prediction? What are the meaningful differences between one’s values and one’s affiliations? And is the American two-party system working for or against a cohesive republic?
If you value our research and communication efforts, please consider making a donation at santafe.edu/give — and/or rating and reviewing us at Apple Podcasts. You can find numerous other ways to engage with us at santafe.edu/engage. Thank you for listening!
Henrik’s Google Scholar Page
Vicky’s Google Scholar Page
Research we discuss in this episode:
Falling Through the Cracks: A Dynamical Model for the Formation of In-Groups and Out-Groups
A Sampling Model of Social Judgment
Harvesting the wisdom of crowds for election predictions using the Bayesian Truth Serum
Why are U.S. Parties So Polarized? A "Satisficing" Dynamical Model
Do two parties represent the US? Clustering analysis of US public ideology survey
Project Page for the SFI-USC Dornslife Polling Research Collaboration
For more on social cognition and collective decision-making, listen to COMPLEXITY episodes 9 with Mirta Galesic and 20 with Albert Kao.
Follow us on social media:
Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedIn
Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode
Podcast Theme Music by Mitch Mignano