Migration model of peripheral ideological concepts: possibilities of system-dynamic analysis

The work is devoted to the urgent problem of the danger of the growth of extremist sentiments among young people caused by unpredictable changes in ideological attitudes (attitudes) in the group consciousness. Objectives: study of the dynamics of peripheral ideological concepts - one of the structural elements of ideo- logy; identifying the trend of changes in the ideological attitudes of student youth on the example of the South of Russia; assessment of the predictive capabilities of the system dynamic analysis methodology for calculating the dynamics of ideological processes. An attempt was made to approbate the author's method of studying ideological attitudes, which could be conditionally called quantitative narrative analysis. The empirical base was made up of data from a survey of 2500 students in the South of Russia and the results of a five-year monitoring of the development of the ideological situation. The theoretical basis is the morphological approach to the study of ideologies by Michael Frieden and the concept of the cognitive-ideological matrix. In the deve- lopment of this concept, the focus of the study was shifted from the morphology (structure) of ideologies to implicit processes occurring at the border of the cognitive-ideological matrix and the social environment. As a result, a descriptive mental model of peripheral ideological concepts and a conceptual model of their migration based on the Bass diffusion model were built, performed in the AnyLogic simulation system. The result of the study was the identification of a left-liberal trend using narrative analysis, which had replaced the significant predominance of conservative and national-patriotic ideological attitudes in the group youth consciousness. It is concluded that the model of migration of peripheral ideological concepts, created using the method of system dynamics and mathematical statistics, significantly expands the possibilities of forecasting ideological processes, but has some limitations.

1. Анкерсмит Ф.Р. История и тропология: взлет и падение метафоры / пер. с англ. М. Кукарцева, Е. Коломоец, В. Катаева. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, 2003. 496 с.

2. Ахременко А.С., Стукал Д.К., Петров А.П. Сеть или текст? Факторы распространения протеста в социальных медиа: теория и анализ данных // Полис. Политические исследования. 2020. № 2. С. 73-91. 10.17976/ jpps/2020.02.06. DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2020.02.06 EDN: APZWMB

3. Артамонова Ю.Д., Демчук А.Л. Когнитивная теория метафоры в современной российской политологии: методологические проблемы // Политическая наука. 2017. № 2. C. 16-29. EDN: ZAFKUJ

4. Арутюнова Н.Д. Метафора и дискурс // Теория метафоры: сб. / пер. с англ., фр., нем., исп., польск.; вступ. ст. и сост. Н.Д. Арутюновой; общ. ред. Н.Д. Арутюновой, М.А. Журинской. М.: Прогресс, 1990. C. 5-32. EDN: YJZAPV

5. Игры на идеологической периферии. Праворадикальные установки студенческой молодежи Ростовской области / С.П. Поцелуев, М.С. Константинов, П.Н. Лукичев [и др.]; отв. ред. С.П. Поцелуев. Ростов-на-Дону: Изд-во ЮНЦ РАН, 2016. 396 с. EDN: YKXSFT

6. Лакофф Дж., Джонсон М. Метафоры, которыми мы живем / пер. с англ.; под ред. и с предисл. А.Н. Баранова. М.: Едиториал УРСС, 2004. 256 с. EDN: QRAADX

7. Лукичев П.Н. Социологические методы анализа в конфликтологии: учебное пособие. Ростов-на-Дону; Таганрог: Издательство ЮФУ, 2019. 128 с.

8. Поцелуев С.П., Константинов М.С. Мигрирующие концепты правого радикализма в аттитюдах студенческой молодежи Дона // Политическая наука. 2018. № 4. С. 146-178. DOI: 10.31249/poln/2018.04.08 EDN: YQTRZB

9. Уайт Х. Метаистория. Историческое воображение в Европе XIX века / пер. с англ.; под ред. Е.Г. Трубиной, В.В. Харитонова. Екатеринбург: Изд-во Уральского университета, 2002. 528 c.

10. A complex systems approach to the study of ideology: Cognitive-affective structures and the dynamics of belief systems / T. Homer-Dixon, J.L. Maynard, M. Mildenberger, M. Milkoreit, S.J. Mock, S. Quilley, P. Thagard // Journal of Social and Political Psychology. 2013. Vol. 1, N 1. P. 337-363. DOI: 10.5964/jspp.v1i1.36

11. Andersen D.F., Rich E., Macdonald R. System dynamics applications to public policy / Dangerfield B. (eds) // System dynamics. Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science series. N.Y.: Springer, 2020. P. 253-271. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-8790-0_421

12. Bass F.M. A new product growth for model consumer durables // Management science. 1969. Vol. 15, N 5. P. 215-227. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.15.5.215

13. Doyle J.K., Ford D.N. Mental models concepts for system dynamics research // System dynamics review: the journal of the system dynamics society. 1998. Vol. 14, N 1. P. 3-29. :1%3C3::aid-sdr140%3E3.0.co;2-k. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1727(199821)14

14. Doyle J.K., Ford D.N. Mental models concepts revisited: some clarifications and a reply to Lane // System dynamics review. 1999. Vol. 15, N 4. P. 411-415. :4%3C411::aid-sdr181%3E3.0.co;2-r. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1727(199924)15

15. Eden C. Cognitive mapping and problem structuring for system dynamics model building // System dynamics review. 1994. Vol. 10, N 2-3. P. 257-276. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.4260100212

16. Edmonds B. Co-developing beliefs and social influence networks-towards understanding socio-cognitive processes like Brexit // Quality & Quantity: International journal of methodology. 2020. Vol. 54, N 2. P. 491-515. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-019-00891-9 EDN: NARIXB

17. Ford D.N. A system dynamics glossary // System dynamics review. 2019. Vol. 35, N 4. P. 369-379. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.1641

18. Freeden M. Ideologies and political theory: a conceptual approach. Oxford: Oxford university press, 2006. 592 p.

19. Freeden M. The morphological analysis of ideology // Oxford handbook of political ideologies / M. Freeden, M. Stears (eds). Oxford: Oxford university press, 2013. P. 115-137.

20. Gill R. An integrated social fabric matrix/system dynamics approach to policy analysis // System dynamics review. 1996. Vol. 12, N 3. P. 167-181. :3%3C167::aid-sdr100%3E3.0.co;2-3. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1727(199623)12

21. Groesser S.N., Schaffernicht M. Mental models of dynamic systems: taking stock and looking ahead // System dynamics review. 2012. Vol. 28, N 1. P. 46-68. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.476

22. Lane D.C. Friendly amendment: a commentary on Doyle and Ford's proposedre-definition of ‘mental model' // System dynamics review. 1999. Vol. 15, N 2. P. 185-194. :2%3C185:: aid-sdr166%3E3.0.co;2-c. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1727(199922)15

23. Luna-Reyes L.F., Andersen D.L. Collecting and analyzing qualitative data for system dynamics: methods and models // System dynamics review. 2003. Vol. 19, N 4. P. 271-296. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.280

24. Lyneis J.M, Ford D.N. System dynamics applied to project management: a survey, assessment, and directions for future research // System dynamics review. 2007. Vol. 23, N 2-3. P. 157-189. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.377

25. Morecroft J.D.W. System dynamics: Portraying bounded rationality // Omega. 1983. Vol. 11, N 2. P. 131-142. DOI: 10.1016/0305-0483(83)90002-6

26. Potseluev S.P., Konstantinov M.S., Podshibyakina T.A. Flickering Concepts of cognitive ideological matrices (based on a series of sociological studies in 2015-2020) // Revista genero e direto. 2020. Vol. 9, N 2. P. 807-826. EDN: VMWGPE

27. Richardson G.P. Reflections on the foundations of system dynamics // System dynamics review. 2011. Vol. 27, N 3. P. 219-243. DOI: 10.1002/sdr.462

28. Thagard P. The cognitive-affective structure of political ideologies // Emotion in group decision and negotiation / B. Martinovski (ed). Berlin: Springer, 2015. P. 51-71. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-9963-8_3