Sociology

Choosing agent-based modelling as a method of social research: practical recommendations

Ukr. socìum, 2026, 1(96): 9-26
Language:
English
27

Agent-based modelling (ABM) has gained widespread adoption as a computational method in the social sciences. However, methodological criteria for determining the appropriateness of applying ABM remain insufficiently formulated. This study addresses the problem of inappropriate ABM selection, which leads to methodological errors and inefficient resource allocation. The article analyses ABM’s historical development across four phases, from its origins in complex systems theory to its contemporary achievements. We examine the trajectory of ABM development in Ukraine, demonstrating how researchers have applied established methodologies to language dynamics, electoral processes, and epidemic modelling since the early 2010s, focusing on empirical applications to local phenomena. We found that different modelling paradigms reflect distinct epistemological approaches: statistical models serve forecasting, while ABM explains generative mechanisms and explores hypothetical scenarios. The author has developed an eight-criterion assessment framework to evaluate agent autonomy, heterogeneity, local interactions, feedback mechanisms, path dependence, emergent properties, research objectives, and the availability of analytical solutions. Each criterion receives a score of 0 to 2, giving total scores ranging from –8 to 14. The fitness of ABM is defined as high (11–14 points), moderate (7–10 points), or low (less than 7 points). Validation demonstrates distributive capacity: Schelling’s segregation model achieves 14 points while traffic optimisation receives 0 points. Application to 17 Ukrainian ABM studies published in 2010–2024 revealed the following distribution: eight cases (44%) demonstrated high fitness addressing complex systems, six cases (33%) received moderate fitness with certain limitations, four cases (22%) showed low fitness due to terminological misunderstanding. Correlation analysis identifies emergence and path dependence as the strongest predictors of ABM appropriateness. Ukrainian research demonstrates stronger methodological foundations than global patterns, where approximately 80% of applications follow minimal ad hoc approaches.

  1. Gilbert, N., Conte, R. (Eds.). (1995). Artificial societies: The computer simulation of social life. UCL Press.

  2. Epstein, J.M., Axtell, R. (1996). Growing artificial societies: Social science from the bottom up. MIT Press.

  3. Goldstone, R.L., Janssen, M.A. (2005). Computational models of collective behavior. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9 (9), 424-430.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.07.009

  4. Conte, R., Paolucci, M. (2014). On agent-based modeling and computational social science. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 668.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00668

  5. Adediran, T.V., Al Bazi, A. (2017). Agent Based Model for Complex Flow Shop Manufacturing Systems with Customer-Related Production Disruptions. In 2017 8th International Conference on Information Technology (pp. 767-773). IEEE.

    https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITECH.2017.8079943

  6. Soriano, J.B., Valdez, A.R.L., Tomacruz, A.J.C., Chavez, J.O., Amoranto, P.S. (2024). Improving Throughput Using Traffic Signalization Based on Critical Queuing and Addition of Superstreets. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 15, 2606-2615.

    https://doi.org/10.11175/easts.15.2606

  7. Epstein, J.M. (2006). Generative social science: Studies in agent-based computational modeling. Princeton University Press.

  8. Hamill, L. (2010). Agent-based modeling: The next 15 years. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 4 (13), 7.

    https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.1640

  9. Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. URL: http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/

  10. Gilbert, N., Doran, J. (Eds.). (1994). Simulating societies: The computer simulation of social phenomena. UCL Press.

    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351165129

  11. Conte, R., Castelfranchi, C. (1995). Cognitive and social action. UCL Press.

  12. Dean, J., Gumerman, G., Epstein, J., Axtell, R., Swedlund, A., Parker, M., Mccarroll, S. (2000). Understanding Anasazi culture change through agent-based modeling. In T.A. Kohler., G.J. Gumerman (Eds.), Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies: Agent-Based Modelling of Social and Spatial Processes (pp. 179-205). Oxford University Press.

  13. Brock, W.A., Hommes, C.H. (1998). Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 8-9 (22), 1235-1274.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1889(98)00011-6

  14. Gilbert, N., Troitzsch, K.G. (1999). Simulation for the social scientist. Open University Press.

  15. Wilensky, U., Rand, W. (2007). Making models match: Replicating an agent-based model. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 10 (42). URL: https://www.jasss.org/10/4/2.html

  16. Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F., Weisbuch, G. (2000). Mixing beliefs among interacting agents. Advances in Complex Systems, 1-4 (3), 87-98.

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525900000078

  17. Hegselmann, R., Krause, U. (2002). Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: Models, analysis, and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 3 (5). URL: https://www.jasss.org/5/3/2.html

  18. Ferguson, N.M., Cummings, D.A.T., Fraser, C., Cajka, J.C., Cooley, P.C., Burke, D.S. (2006). Strategies for mitigating an influenza pandemic. Nature, 442, 448-452.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04795

  19. Parker, D.C., Manson, S.M., Janssen, M.A., Hoffmann, M.J., Deadman, P. (2008). Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land-cover change: A review. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2 (93), 314-337.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8306.9302004

  20. Weidlich, A., Veit, D.J. (2008). A critical survey of agent-based wholesale electricity market models. Energy Economics, 4 (30), 1728-1759.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2008.01.003

  21. Grimm, V., Berger, U., Bastiansen, F., Eliassen, S., Ginot, V., Giske, J., Goss-Custard, J., Grand, T., Heinz, S., Huse, G., Huth, A., Jepsen, J., Jørgensen, C., Mooij, W., Müller, B., Pe’er, G., Piou, C., Railsback, S., Robbins, A., Deangelis, D. (2006). A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models. Ecological Modelling, 1-2 (198), 115-126.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.04.023

  22. Gilbert, N. (1998). Editorial. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 1 (1). URL: https://www.jasss.org/1/1/editorial.html

  23. Ahrweiler, P., Pyka, A., Gilbert, N. (2014). Simulating knowledge dynamics in innovation networks: Understanding complex systems. Springer.

  24. Deffuant, G., Chattoe, E., Le Bars, M. (2003). An agent-based model of agri-environmental measure diffusion: What for? IMAGES Final Workshop. Clermont-Ferrand, France.

  25. Krywkow, J., Valkering, P., Rotmans, J., Veen, A. (2002). Agent-based and integrated assessment modelling for incorporating social dynamics in the management of the Meuse in the Dutch Province of Limburg. In Integrated assessment and decision support: Proceedings of the First Biennial Meeting of the International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (pp. 263-268). Brigham Young University. URL: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/iemssconference/2002/all/91

  26. Ramanath, A.M., Gilbert, N. (2004). The design of participatory agent-based social simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 4 (7). URL: http://www.jasss.org/7/4/1.html

  27. Andrighetto, G., Conte, R., Turrini, P., Paolucci, M. (2007). Emergence in the loop: Simulating the two-way dynamics of norm innovation. In Normative Multi-agent Systems. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 7122 (pp. 1-30), Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik.

    https://doi.org/10.4230/DagSemProc.07122.13

  28. Epstein, J.M. (2023). Inverse generative social science: Backward to the future. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 2 (26), 9.

    https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.5083

  29. Park, J., O’Brien, J., Cai, C., Morris, M., Liang, P., Bernstein, M. (2023). Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, 1-22.

  30. Squazzoni, F., Polhill, G.J., Edmonds, B., Ahrweiler, P., Antosz, P., Scholz, G., Chappin, E., Borit, M., Verhagen, H., Giardini, F., Gilbert, N. (2020). Computational models that matter during a global pandemic outbreak: A call to action. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 2 (23), 10.

    https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.4298

  31. Lorig, F., Johansson, E., Davidsson, P. (2021). Agent-based social simulation of the Covid-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 3 (24), 5.

    https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.4601

  32. Paniotto, V.I., Hrushetskyi, A.M. (2013). Is modeling died yet? History of Social Modeling in Ukraine and Agent-Based Approach on Example of Language Situation Forecasting in Ukraine. In Current state and prospects for the development of sociology in Ukraine and Europe: proceedings of the international sociological readings in memory of N.V. Panina (pp. 23-47). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences [in Ukrainian]

  33. Hrushetskyi, A.M. (2014). Agent-based modeling: Basic ideas and prospects. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA: Sociological Sciences, 161, 21-27. URL: https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/server/api/core/bitstreams/0196c219-1768-4d64-bc43-388133fa629c/content [in Ukrainian]

  34. Moskotina, R. (2021). Sociological theory formalization with agent-based modeling. Sociological Studios, 1 (18), 41-48 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.29038/2306-3971-2021-01-41-48

  35. Moskotina, R. (2019). Protest Engagement: Weak vs Strong Social Ties. Ukr. socìum – Ukrainian Society, 3 (70), 23-33 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2019.03.023

  36. Vengrina, I.E. (2011). Social Simulation methods in the analysis of social phenomena and processes. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA: Sociological Sciences, 122, 14-18. URL:  https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/items/5e79078d-3ddf-4f22-ba38-7a5885028ac2 [in Ukrainian]

  37. Vengrina, I.E. (2012). Language dynamics through simulation modeling. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA: Sociological Sciences, 135, 19-24. URL: https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/2119 [in Ukrainian]

  38. Hrushetskyi, A.M. (2013). Review of possible methods for modeling and forecasting the dynamics of the language situation. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA: Sociological Sciences, 148, 31-38. URL: https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/bitstreams/d25d8cc8-537b-4157-9df6-65212a9872b2/download [in Ukrainian]

  39. Pugachova, O.G. (2019). Agent-based Simulation of Revenue Policy. NaUKMA Research Papers. Sociology, 2, 16-22 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-9067.2019.2.16-22

  40. Pugachova, O.G., Solov’ienko, K.M. (2010). Agent-based modeling of the election process. Ukr. socìum – Ukrainian Society, 1 (32), 157-164 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2010.01.157

  41. Pugachova, O.G. (2021). Modelling COVID-19 Epidemic and Its Social Consequences. NaUKMA Research Papers. Sociology, 4, 18-27 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-9067.2021.4.18-27

  42. Sayama, H. (2015). Introduction to the Modeling and Analysis of Complex Systems. Milne Open Textbooks. URL: https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/233

  43. Weaver, W. (1948). Science and complexity. American Scientist, 36, 536-544.

  44. Epstein, J.M. (2008). Why Model? Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 4 (11), 12. URL: https://www.jasss.org/11/4/12.html

  45. Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. 2nd. Cambridge University Press.

  46. Wasserman, S., Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.

  47. Reiss, J. (2011). A plea for (good) simulations: Nudging economics toward an experimental science. Simulation & Gaming, 2 (42), 243-264.

  48. Barlas, Y., Carpenter, S. (1990). Philosophical roots of model validation: Two paradigms. System Dynamics Review, 2 (6), 148-166.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.4260060203

  49. Prosperi, M., Guo, Y., Sperrin, M., Koopman, J.S., Min, J.S., Xing, He, Rich, S., Mo Wang, Buchan, I.E., Jiang Bian. (2020). Causal inference and counterfactual prediction in machine learning for actionable healthcare. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2 (7), 369-375.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-0197-y

  50. An, L., Grimm, V., Sullivan, A., Turner, II B.L. (2020). Editorial: Meeting Grand Challenges in Agent-Based Models. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 1 (23), 13.

    https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.4012

  51. Schelling, T.C. (2010). Dynamic models of segregation. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1 (2), 143-186.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.1971.9989794

  52. Gorokhovskyi, S., Radziievska, O. (2021). Agent-Based Modeling of Collaborative Work. NaUKMA Research Papers. Computer Science, 4, 60-63 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-3808.2021.4.60-63

  53. Aksak, N.G., Tatarnikov, A.O., Kushnarov, M.V. (2025). An Agent-Based Model for Personalized Learning in Netlogo Using Q-Learning. Applied questions of mathematical modeling, 1 (8), 11-25 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.32782/mathematical-modelling/2025-8-1-1

  54. Dorohyi, Ya.Yu., Tsurkan, V.V., Dembitskyi, A.S. (2017). Application of the genetic algorithm for agent-based modeling of the object behavior while leaving the flaming room. Microsystems, electronics and acoustics, 6 (22), 71-78 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.20535/2523-4455.2017.22.6.105199

  55. Stets, O.V., Humeniuk, B.Ye. (2020). Modeling of Tax Agent Based Models Economics. Actual Problems of Economics and Management, 14. URL: https://ela.kpi.ua/handle/123456789/37816 [in Ukrainian]

  56. Shaitanova, Ye.S. (2019). Agent Modeling of Adoption Investing Decisions with The Contingency of Behavioral Factors. Pryazovskyi economic herald, 3 (14), 467-475. URL: https://pev.kpu.zp.ua/journals/2019/3_14_uk/80.pdf [in Ukrainian]

  57. Panovyk, U., Kutas, S. (2025). Agent-based modeling of the behavior of a distributed IoT system for printing production. Measuring and computing devices in technological processes, 2 (82), 103-110 [in Ukrainian]

  58. Poluektova, N., Pereverzev, A., Dereza, K. (2022). Modeling the effectiveness of distance learning using an agent-based approach. In Proceedings of 2022 International Conference on Innovative Solutions in Software Engineering (pp. 7-14). Ivano-Frankivsk: Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University [in Ukrainian]

  59. Pivovarov, M.G., Shapovalov, O.M. (2014). Agent-based modeling as a tool for assessing the efficiency of the logistics system of a steel company. Herald of the Economic Sciences of Ukraine, 2 (26), 119-123. URL: http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/77153 [in Ukrainian]

  60. Vasylchenko, K.G. (2020). Simulation Modeling of Taxpayers’ Behavior on The Labor Market in Ukraine. Socio-Economic Research Bulletin, 3-4 (74-75), 21-32 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.33987/vsed.3-4(74-75).2020.21-32

  61. Korotkov, S.S., Lashchevska, N.O., Dovzhenko, T.P. (2025). Methods of Managing A Self-Organizing Network Based on Agent-Based Modeling with Fuzzy Logic. Connectivity, 4 (176), 123-131 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.31673/2412-9070.2025.048452

  62. Volokha, M.P. (2018). Imitation Agents for Modeling Mechanized Technological Processes for Manufacture of Buryaks. Scientific Reports of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, 3 (14), 73 [in Ukrainian]

  63. Mazhara, H.A., Parkhomuk, A.R. (2024). Enterprise Financial Flows Simulation on A Car Dealership Example. Economy of Industry, 4 (108), 86-98 [in Ukrainian]

    https://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry2024.04.086