IJSSER

Title: THE COLLECTIVE SOCIAL BRAIN AND THE EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION
Authors: Andy E. Williams
\|\| \|\|
Andy E. Williams Executive Director, Nobeah Foundation, Nairobi, Kenya
MLA 8 Williams, Andy E. "THE COLLECTIVE SOCIAL BRAIN AND THE EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, vol. 8, no. 9, Sept. 2023, pp. 2864-2876, doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2023.v08i09.028. Accessed Sept. 2023. APA 6 Williams, A. (2023, September). THE COLLECTIVE SOCIAL BRAIN AND THE EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION. Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, 8(9), 2864-2876. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2023.v08i09.028 Chicago Williams, Andy E. "THE COLLECTIVE SOCIAL BRAIN AND THE EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL POLARIZATION." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research 8, no. 9 (September 2023), 2864-2876. Accessed September, 2023. https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2023.v08i09.028.
References [1]. Bobo, L. (1988). Attitudes toward the Black Political Movement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52(3), 287-302. [2]. Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. [3]. Carroll, S. (2004). Spacetime and Geometry. Addison Wesley. [4]. Chen, G. M. (2012). Why do women write personal blogs? Satisfying needs for self-disclosure and affiliation tell part of the story. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 171–180. [5]. Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A., & O'Brien, L. (2002). Social Norms and the Expression and Suppression of Prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 359-378. [6]. Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pretraining of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), 4171–4186. [7]. Dignum, V. (2019). Responsible Artificial Intelligence: How to Develop and Use AI in a Responsible Way. Springer Nature. [8]. Doe et al., (2021), Title of the paper. [9]. Doe et al., (Under Review), Has OpenAI Achieved Artificial General Intelligence in ChatGPT? [10]. Doe et al., (Under Review), Why All Technology Might be Accelerating to a Branching Point Between Two Singularities. [11]. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution, 22(6), 469-493. [12]. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1998). The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology, 6(5), 178-190. [13]. Einstein, A. (1916). Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie. Annalen der Physik, 354(7), 769-822. [14]. Fetzer, T., Hensel, L., Hermle, J., & Roth, C. (2020). Coronavirus Perceptions and Economic Anxiety. Review of Economics and Statistics, 1-41. [15]. Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [16]. Géron, A. (2019). Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow (2nd ed.). O'Reilly Media. [17]. Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Gut Feelings: The Intelligence of the Unconscious. Viking Penguin. [18]. Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. Pantheon. [19]. Henrich, J. (2016). The Secret of Our Success: How Culture Is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter. Princeton University Press. [20]. Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707. [21]. Jordan, M. I., & Mitchell, T. M. (2015). Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science, 349(6245), 255–260. [22]. Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political Ideology: Its Structure, Functions, and Elective Affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307-337. [23]. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. [24]. Kumar, S., Morstatter, F., & Liu, H. (2013). Twitter Data Analytics. Springer. [25]. Loper, E., & Bird, S. (2002). NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit. In Proceedings of the ACL-02 Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics (pp. 63–70). [26]. Mittelstadt, B., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1–21. [27]. Obermeyer, Z., & Emanuel, E. J. (2016). Predicting the Future — Big Data, Machine Learning, and Clinical Medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375(13), 1216–1219. [28]. Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press. [29]. Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform Capitalism. Polity Press. [30]. Törnberg, P. (2023). Chatgpt-4 outperforms experts and crowd workers in annotating political twitter messages with zero-shot learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06588.
ABSTRACT: Purpose of the study: In this exploratory research paper, we utilize the capabilities of ChatGPT4, an advanced artificial intelligence model, to investigate the collective social brain hypothesis in the context of political polarization. We posit that human groups can be broadly categorized into two response profiles that correspond to two halves of a “collective social brain”, one half of which uses a problem-solving method (system I thinking) that tends to use consensus for evaluating truth in areas in which they feel vulnerable and in need of protection. The other half tends to use system II thinking to think independently in those same areas as they don't feel vulnerable. These problem-solving methods simply come to different conclusions given the same information. Both thinking types are useful for solving different problems, but are harmful when applied to the wrong problems. Groups at the size of the ancestral tribes we evolved in can switch to whatever thinking System Is optimal, but at the size of current societies these switching mechanisms break down and exchanging more information (news, social media, etc.) just leads to more polarization. Methodology: Leveraging AI-based simulations, we collect and analyze data from social media discourse, categorizing responses into these response profiles. Main Findings: Our simulated findings reveal distinct response profiles prevalent in comments, varying by topic, platform, geographical location, and time of posting. We observe a significant association between the type of reasoning used and the topic of the post. Our research supports the collective social brain hypothesis and highlights the potential for mitigating polarization through the recognition and accommodation of differing reasoning styles. Research limitations/implications: AI simulations present certain limitations. Novelty/Originality of this study: Our work emphasizes their utility as a precursor to comprehensive human studies while underscoring the role of AI in advancing our understanding of political polarization and offers significant implications for policy and future research.

IJSSER is Member of