cases where I$_{i}$ is formed by agent i and super-agent s , the last one will be able to introduce its own value on agent i with probability 0.5. The iteration of this process in time drives the system to a close monocultural state. A more interesting situation occurs for middle values of q where it is observed a minimum of the < S > /A values as a function of q , more pronounced for ϵ = 0.05 and q = 10 in Fig. 2 a) and ϵ = 1.00 and q = 15 in Fig. 2 b). For values of q close to the corresponding minimum, the initial diversity is such that besides agent i and s , some of the agent’s neighbors are also included in the set of influence I. Then the interacting dynamics involves higher cultural diversity on the set of influence I$_{i}$ and the super-agent fails to induce a strong monocultural final state. It is interesting to note that when comparing Fig. 2 a) and b) it can be seen that the increase of the number of neighbors included in the social interaction decreases the size of the biggest culture in the absorbing state and then a more pronounced multicultural state is reached for the same values of q and ϵ . The value of q where the minimum of S is attained also increases. This is a consequence of a direct competition between the higher diversity on the set I$_{i}$ and the homogenized influence of the super-agent. In Fig. 2 b), the amount of neighbors to be analyzed for inclusion on the set I$_{i}$ is twelve. Three times the case in Fig. 2 a), which is only four. Then with p = 2, at any value of q there will be, with higher probability, bigger diversity of trait values than in the case of p = 1 and, therefore, a weakening of the homogenizing effects of the super-agent is expected. This decreases the possibility of the super-agent to drive the system to a monocultural absorbing state because the probability for a trait value of the super-agent to appear with the highest frequency on the set of influence is lower and lower values of S are obtained. Then, when considering more neighbors in the social interaction the higher local diversity reinforces the final multicultural state, even with the presence of a mass media. On the other hand, when comparing the dots line for < S > with the dotter line for < δ > in Fig. 2 a) it can be seen that they both coincide for all values of q when ϵ has higher values ( ϵ = 1 . 00 and ϵ = 3 . 00). It means that the information of the super-agent is present only in the biggest culture of the society. Nevertheless, for small values of ϵ , the two curves coincide for higher values of q , but the values of < δ > are higher than the values of < S > for middle values of q . Then, in this situation although the final state does not correspond to a strong monoculture, the information of the super-agent on the society 11