Since Le Bon introduced his profound theory about the crowd in 1895, the phenomenon has been investigated across a range of scientific disciplines. Nevertheless, the mystery of the popular mind seems so far unrevealed, especially with the emergence of unfamiliar crowd movements, such as Twitter revolutions, which are triggered by novel types of media and interpersonal communication. Such original collective behavior, along with the current turbulent sociopolitical global environment, has necessitated the development of explanatory contemporary models. This research introduces a new revolutionary crowd model with a unique set of internal and external factors that can fit the modern uprisings in order to enable the understanding of the conditions that could lead to or prohibit the formation of revolutionary crowds. The model is implemented to examine the effectiveness of oscillating intensified mass media on the crowd pattern and dynamics. Among several emergent behaviors, the model shows an insignificant impact of disrupted intensified media on the crowd, in contrast with consistent low-intensity media, the failure of contagion theory in sustaining a revolution without a persistent stimulus, and the refutation of current claims of the insignificancy of leaders’ roles in igniting and maintaining modern crowds.
BanarjeeSGrosanCAbrahamA. Emotional ant based modeling of crowd dynamics. In: Seventh international symposium on symbolic and numeric algorithms for scientific computing, Timisoara, Romania, 25–29 September 2005, pp.279–286. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
2.
Le BonG. The crowd: A study of the popular mind. 3rd ed.Minneapolis, MN: Filiquarian Publishing, 2005.
3.
LevyL. A study of sports crowd behavior: The case of the great pumpkin incident, J Sport Soc Issues1989; 13: 69–91.
4.
NiaziMHussainA. Agent-based computing from multi-agent systems to agent-based models: a visual survey. Scientometrics2011; 89: 479–499.
5.
LemosCCoelhoHLopesRJ. Agent-based modeling of social conflict, civil violence and revolution: State-of-the-art-review and further prospects. In: 11th European workshop on multi-agent systems, Toulouse, France, 12–13 December 2013, pp.124–138.
6.
DaviesTPFryHMWilsonAGet al. A mathematical model of the London riots and their policing. Sci Rep2013; 3: 1303.
7.
GranovetterM. Threshold models of collective behavior. Am J Sociol1978; 83: 1420–1443.
8.
MakowskyMDRubinJ. An agent-based model of centralized institutions, social network technology, and revolutionPLoS One2013; 8: e80380.
9.
WijermansNJornaRJagerWet al. CROSS: Modelling crowd behaviour with social-cognitive agents. J Artif Soc Social Simul2013; 16: 1.
AlmeidaJERossetiRCoelhoAL. Crowd simulation modeling applied to emergency and evacuation simulations using multi-agent systems. In: SousaAAOliveiraE (Eds.) DSIE’11—6th doctoral symposium on informatics engineering, Porto, Portugal, 27–28 January 2011, pp.93–104.
13.
IjazKSohailSHashishS. A survey of latest approaches for crowd simulation and modeling using hybrid techniques. In: UKSIM ’15 proceedings of the 2015 17th UKSIM-AMSS international conference on modelling and simulation, Cambridge, UK, 25–27 March 2015, pp.111–116, 2015. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
14.
ÜblerHHartmannS. Simulating trends in artificial influence networks. J Artif Soc Social Simul2016; 19: 2.
15.
PulickEKorthPGrimPet al. Modeling interaction effects in polarization: Individual media influence and the impact of town meetings. J Artif Soc Social Simul2016; 19: 1.
16.
ToivonenROnnelaJ-PSaramaiJet al. A model for social networks. Physica A2006; 371: 851–860.
17.
KrackhardtD. The strength of strong ties: The importance of Philos in organizations. In: NohriaNEcclesRG (eds.) Networks and organizations: structure, form, and action. Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 1992, pp.216–239.
18.
EasleyDKleinbergJ. Networks, crowds, and markets: reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
19.
JiangRWuQS. The moving behavior of a large object in the crowds in a narrow channel. Physica A2006; 364: 457–463.
20.
TajimaYNagataniT. Scaling behavior of crowd flow outside a hall. Physica A2001; 292: 545–554.
21.
GomezNP. Modeling realistic high density autonomous agent crowd movement: Social forces, communication, roles and psychological influences. PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, USA, 2006.
22.
KuranT. Sparks and prairie fires: A theory of unanticipated political revolution. Public Choice1989; 61: 41–74.
GohCQuekHYTanKCet al. Modeling civil violence: An evolutionary multi-agent, game theoretic approach. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, Vancouver, BC, 16–21 July 2006, pp.1624–1631. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
27.
FonoberovaMFonoberovVAMezicIet al. Nonlinear dynamics of crime and violence in urban settings. J Artif Soc Social Simul2012; 15: 2.
28.
KhaldūnI. The Muqaddimah: An introduction to history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1967.
29.
LocherDA. Collective behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002.
30.
KlandermansBvan StekelenburgJ. The social psychology of protest. Curr Sociol Rev, 2013; 61: 886–905.
31.
AndersonCJ. Political satisfaction in old and new democracies. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998.
32.
AhmedM. Students’ exposure to political news on the Internet and political awareness: A comparison on between Germany and Egypt. PhD Thesis, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany, 2011.
33.
Green-PedersenCStubagerR. The political conditionality of mass media influence: When do parties follow mass media attention? Br J Political Sci, 2010; 40: 663–677.
34.
ChenG-M. The impact of new media on intercultural communication in global context citation/publisher attribution. China Media Res2012; 8: 1–10.
35.
HájekP. Metamathematics of fuzzy logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1998.
36.
SuoSChenY. The dynamics of public opinion in complex networks. J Artif Soc Social Simul2008; 11: 1.
37.
EhrenbergASC. Repetitive advertising and the consumer. J Advert Res2000; 40: 39–48.
38.
SargentRG. Verification and validation of simulation models. In: Proceedings of the 2011 winter simulation conference, Phoenix, AZ, 11–14 December 2011, pp.2194–2205. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
39.
IbrahimY. An automated model abstraction approach applied to rule-based multi-agent systems. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2010.
40.
AxtellR. Why agents? On the varied motivations for agent computing in the social sciences. The Brookings Institution, Center on Social and Economic Dynamics, Working Paper No. 17, November 2000.
41.
GilbertNDoranJ. Simulating societies: The computer simulation of social phenomena. London, UK: UCL Press, 1994.
42.
ZeiglerBP. Theory of modelling and simulation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1976.
43.
GilbertNTroitzschKG. Simulation for the social scientist. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2005.
44.
GilbertNConteR. Artificial societies: the computer simulation of social life. London: UCL Press, 1995.
45.
DoranJ. Questions in the methodology of artificial societies. In: SuleimanRTroitzschKGGilbertN (eds) Tools and techniques for social science simulation, Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag HD2000, pp.17–25.
46.
DoranJ. Agent-based modelling of ecosystems for sustainable resource management. Berlin: Springer, 2001, pp.383–403.
