Previous studies have shown that relationship sentiments in families follow a pattern wherein either all maintain positive relationships or there are two antagonistic factions. This result is consistent with the network theory of structural balance that individuals befriend their friends’ friend and become enemies with their friends’ enemies. Fault lines in families would then endogenously emerge through the same kinds of interactional processes that organize nations into axis and allies. We argue that observed patterns may instead exogenously come about as the result of personal characteristics or homophilous partitions of family members. Disentangling these alternate theoretical possibilities requires longitudinal data. The present study tracks the sentiment dynamics of 1,710 families in a longitudinal panel study. Results show the same static patterns suggestive of balancing processes identified in earlier research, yet dynamic analysis reveals that conflict in families is not generated or resolved in accordance with balance theory.

Polarization makes it difficult to form positive relationships across existing groups. Decreasing polarization may improve political discourse around the world. Polarization can be modeled on a social network as structural balance, where the network is composed of groups with positive links between all individuals in the group and negative links with all others. Previous work shows that incorporating attributes of individuals usually makes structural balance, and hence polarization, harder to achieve. That work examines only a limited number and types of attributes. We present a generalized model and a simulation framework to analyze the effect of any type of attribute, including analytically as long as an expected value can be written for the type of attribute. As attributes, we consider people’s (approximately) immutable characteristics (e.g., race, wealth) and such opinions that change more slowly than relationships (e.g., political preferences). We detail and analyze five classes of attributes, recapitulating the results of previous work in this framework and extending it. While it is easier to prevent than to destabilize polarization, we find that usually the most effective at both are continuous attributes, followed by ordered attributes and, finally, binary attributes. The effectiveness of unordered attributes varies depending on the magnitude of negative impact of having differing attributes but is smaller than of continuous ones. Testing the framework on network structures containing communities revealed that destroying polarization may require introducing local tensions. This model could be used by policymakers, among others, to prevent and design effective interventions to counteract polarization.

We investigate structural features and processes associated with the onset of systemic conflict using an approach which integrates complex systems theory with network modeling and analysis. We present a signed network model of cooperation and conflict dynamics in the context of international relations between states. The model evolves ties between nodes under the influence of a structural balance force and a dyad-specific force. Model simulations exhibit a sharp bifurcation from peace to systemic war as structural balance pressures increase, a bistable regime in which both peace and war stable equilibria exist, and a hysteretic reverse bifurcation from war to peace. We show how the analytical expression we derive for the peace-to-war bifurcation condition implies that polarized network structure increases susceptibility to systemic war. We develop a framework for identifying patterns of relationship perturbations that are most destabilizing and apply it to the network of European great powers before World War I. We also show that the model exhibits critical slowing down, in which perturbations to the peace equilibrium take longer to decay as the system draws closer to the bifurcation. We discuss how our results relate to international relations theories on the causes and catalysts of systemic war.

This paper elaborates on two theories of social influence processes to multiplex network structures. First, cohesion influence is based on mutual communication made by different types of relations, and second comparison influence that is built on contrasting types of tie. While a system of bundles with a mutual character constitutes the setting for a multiplex network exposure measure within cohesion, comparison influence is defined algebraically through classes of actors in terms of a weakly balanced semiring structure that considers positive, negative, and also ambivalent types of tie. A case study with these approaches is made on an entrepreneurial community network with formal business relations, informal friendship ties, and perceived competition among the firms, and the methods are validated with the Sampson Monastery data set.