The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Network science on belief system dynamics under logic constraints
Open accessAbstract
Belief system dynamics: People tend to structure their beliefs in a way that appears consistent to them. But how do some beliefs within groups persist in the face of social pressure, whereas others change and, by changing, influence a cascade of other beliefs? Friedkin et al. developed a model that can describe complexes of attitudes in a group that interact and change (see the Perspective by Butts). Their model revealed how the changing views of the U.S. population on the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq changed their views on whether the invasion by the United States was justified. Science , this issue p. 321 ; see also p. 286
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
The Dissemination of Culture: A Model with Local Convergence and Global Polarization
Axelrod, R. (1997) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/0022002797041002001 · Cited by 1,918
Small Worlds and Cultural Polarization
FLACHE, A., & MACY, M. W. (2011) · The Journal of Mathematical Sociology · doi:10.1080/0022250x.2010.532261 · Cited by 237
Cited by
A tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part I
Proskurnikov, A. V., & Tempo, R. (2017) · Annual Reviews in Control · doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2017.03.002 · Cited by 553
Self-citationA tutorial on modeling and analysis of dynamic social networks. Part II
Proskurnikov, A. V., & Tempo, R. (2018) · Annual Reviews in Control · doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2018.03.005 · Cited by 294
Self-citationPluralistic Collapse: The “Oil Spill” Model of Mass Opinion Polarization
DellaPosta, D. (2020) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122420922989 · Cited by 250
Public Discourse and Social Network Echo Chambers Driven by Socio-Cognitive Biases
Wang, X., Sirianni, A. D., Tang, S., Zheng, Z., & Fu, F. (2020) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.10.041042 · Cited by 93
Evans, T., & Fu, F. (2018) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.181122 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Friedkin, N. E., Proskurnikov, A. V., Tempo, R., & Parsegov, S. E.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2016-10-21
- Volume
- 354
- Issue
- 6310
- Pages
- 321-326
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2534090929
- Cited by
- 372
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 17.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Network science on belief system dynamics under logic constraints. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.aag2624
- The paper
- Friedkin, N. E., Proskurnikov, A. V., Tempo, R., & Parsegov, S. E. (2016). Network science on belief system dynamics under logic constraints. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2624
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
