What algae can tell us about political strategy

August 9, 2017 by Jenna Marshall
In the disassortative structure (left) both competitors can coexist whereas the assortative structure (right) leads to a winner-takes-all scenario. Credit: Libby et al, 2017, Scientific Reports

While single-celled organisms typically only make it into political discussion during insults, it turns out that modeling their behavior may give researchers a better handle on how political movements survive and spread.

In a new paper published in Scientific Reports, researchers modeled systems where strategies or ideologies compete for members. By varying the extent to which members of a given system worked offensively or defensively, trying to convert individuals to their "side" or trying to keep similar individuals, they found some general principles that may begin to explain how differing strategies play out.

"The original angle for this was not a political slant. It was actually algae," said study author Eric Libby, an SFI Omidyar Fellow who studies communities of unicellular microbes. But, he noted, "I think that the political handle on this is probably more intuitive."

Initially, Libby and SFI Research Fellow Laurent Hébert-Dufresne were looking at how algae evolve differing complex life cycles, such as which nutrients to absorb. After a working with their collaborators, they saw it might help explain dynamics in a population where two groups compete for resources—in this case, voters.

In the original simulation model developed, which included just two distinct groups, individuals displaying one ideology might adopt the other if they were around enough people with the opposite beliefs seeking to influence them.

Over time, the researchers found that when two competing ideologies squared off with (predominantly) offensive strategies, many individuals would convert from one side to the other, and both parties would persist. Meanwhile, when both ideologies were more defensive, rather than lead to a stalemate, the less defensive group disappeared entirely, as a small initial loss would ultimately be amplified. A fifty-fifty offense-defense mix was found to be the best .

But when a third party was added to the mix, the winning strategy was one that used a level of offense higher than one opponent but lower than the other. There was no single best strategy. "If you have multiple strategies competing, there doesn't seem to be an optimal solution," explained Libby. "It really depends on who else you're competing against."

Explore further: From offense to defense in ecology and politics

More information: Laurent Hébert-Dufresne et al. Strategic tradeoffs in competitor dynamics on adaptive networks, Scientific Reports (2017). DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-07621-x

Related Stories

From offense to defense in ecology and politics

January 18, 2017

As online social networks grow, it gets easier to turn our own social circles into echo chambers of the like-minded or heated debates across ideological divides, as we please. In a working group happening now, SFI researchers ...

A winning strategy for multicellular life

January 7, 2016

Environmental triggers may have tipped the transition from single- to multi-cellular life, according to new research by SFI REU Emma Wolinsky and Omidyar Fellow Eric Libby.

Accounting for politics in green energy transitions

April 25, 2016

Politics plays a hand in how, and whether, a nation transitions to renewable energy. But despite the significant effects of policy on technological progress, few growth projections for renewables take political dynamics into ...

Recommended for you

New paper answers causation conundrum

November 17, 2017

In a new paper published in a special issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, SFI Professor Jessica Flack offers a practical answer to one of the most significant, and most confused questions in evolutionary ...

Chance discovery of forgotten 1960s 'preprint' experiment

November 16, 2017

For years, scientists have complained that it can take months or even years for a scientific discovery to be published, because of the slowness of peer review. To cut through this problem, researchers in physics and mathematics ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.