Concepts and Assumptions of Coherence Model (2001)

1. Concepts and Assumptions of Coherence Model (2001) • Expected Regret: subjective probability-weighted difference between maximal utility possible in a particular state of the environment and the utility provided by a chosen set of actions • Coherence: expected regret of zero • PREFERENCE AND BELIEF ASSUMPTIONS OF MODEL • Meta-optimization • Environment constrains Beliefs • No “Yogic Utility” • Parametric form, but not parametric values, determined by exposure to social communication • Forms considered in order of message prevalence of communications describing such forms, but parameter weightings can be accepted or rejected. •  c.f. Chai 2001.

2. Intuitions behind Model actors are engaged in a collective process of constructing their own identities this process is aimed at creating an individual and collective sense of self that is both positive and consistent preferences and beliefs are not mere precursors to action, but there is a mutually causative relationship between these entities

3. Coherence (preference-based): adjustment of g, h to minimize d Expected Regret (single-period, individual form): d = òs (u(s,a*(s)) –u(s,a))) p(s) ds where a*(s)=argmaxaÎA u(s,a) a=argmax aÎA, sÎS òsu(s,a) p(s) ds s states of the environment, a actions, u utility function, and p subjective probabilities

4. Some non-intuitive implications of coherence model. . . Means will become ends (functional autonomy of motives) iff there exists there exists perception of some state of environment where alternative actions superior Sour grapes / forbidden fruit effect caused by actions that are perceived to preserve / alter the status quo more than alternatives Wishful / unwishful thinking strongest when an individual adopts actions that are subject to more / less variation in comparison to alternatives Effects depend on and magnify in proportion to subjective probability and extent to which chosen action will be suboptimal

5. Some implications linking structure to culture Mutual altruism will be generated in groups engaging in repeated collective action, particularly where public goods are generated more reliably than private goods Materialistic culture will be generated by clearly defined structures of mobility in which the relative returns to vocational choices is not circumstance-dependent Explicit ideologies will be adopted by groups whose members face incoherence with regards to a similar set of action choices.

6. Some implications linking structure to culture Mutual altruism will be generated in groups engaging in repeated collective action, particularly where public goods are generated more reliably than private goods Materialistic culture will be generated by clearly defined structures of mobility in which the relative returns to vocational choices is not circumstance-dependent Explicit ideologies will be adopted by groups whose members face incoherence with regards to a similar set of action choices.

7. Some implications linking structure to culture Mutual altruism will be generated in groups engaging in repeated collective action, particularly where public goods are generated more reliably than private goods Materialistic culture will be generated by clearly defined structures of mobility in which the relative returns to vocational choices is not circumstance-dependent Explicit ideologies will be adopted by groups whose members face incoherence with regards to a similar set of action choices.

8. Aggregate-Level Implications for Ethnic Boundaries and Mobilization (2001, 2005) Proposition 1: The boundaries of a large-scale group will be based on an ascriptive attribute that surrounds rather than cross-cuts existing primary group boundaries and can be used as an extension of cosanguinity, i.e. one of the following: race, language, religion, or region of birth, or a combination of those attributes. Proposition 2: The boundaries will also encompass an appropriate share of thepower resources in the main arena of social interaction so that a ”minimum winning coalition” is formed. Proposition 3: Where multiple potential boundaries for large scale groups mee the ascriptive and power share requirements, the one chosen will be one that brings together individuals sharing a particular common position within in the economic and political structure.

9. Questions in “Translating” Coherence Model into Agent-Based Simulation What is appropriate quantity and nature of additional complexity that should be incorporated into cultural and structural attributes? individual-level attributes ascriptive characteristics physical and social “capitals” preferences and beliefs relational characteristics structural-level attributes formal institutional environment physical infrast “state of nature” choice set Will incorporation of additional complexity lead to qualitatively different results for ethnic group boundaries and mobilization?

10. Questions in “Translating” Coherence Model into Agent-Based Simulation Given additional attributes, how to populate them? secondary datasets primary experimental data manifest vs. latent content analysis existing original case studies vs. existing ethnographies How does user experience of software influence underlying model? nature of output information level of concreteness at policies specified degree of control over underlying assumptions

11. Organization of CCPV “Subteams” Social Science Cultural and Formal Modeling Min-Sun Kim and Sun-Ki Chai (leads) development of actor and structural ontology for application of coherence model, development of action model

12. Organization of CCPV “Subteams” Empirical Quantitative Social Scientists Sun-Ki Chai (lead) Ming Liu Dolgorsuren Dorj use of secondary datasets and computer mediated experiments to populate attributes and validate model

13. Organization of CCPV “Subteams” • Regional Specialists • Abdul Karim Khan (lead) - Pakistan and Afghanistan • Kiran Sagoo - Malaysia, Indian Diaspora Countries • Cecilia Noble - Philippines • Henry Hail - China Minority Regions • Develop of qualititative case studies to apply and test • coherence model, identify possible "missing" factors and • their influence

14. Organization of CCPV “Subteams” Computer Science Team David Chin and Scott Robertson (leads) Dong-wan Kang and additional GAs to be hired implementation of coherence and action models, development of user interface