On Direct vs. Indirect Peer Influence in Large Social Networks

References

• Agarwal R, Gupta AK, Kraut R (2008) Editorial overview—The interplay between digital and social networks. Inform. Systems Res. 19(3):243–252.Link, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):425–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allenby GM, Rossi PE (1998) Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity. J. Econometrics 89(1–2):57–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Walker D (2011) Creating social contagion through viral product design: A randomized trial of peer influence in networks. Management Sci. 57(9):1623–1639.Link, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Muchnik L, Sundararajan A (2009) Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106(51):21544–21549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bass F (1969) A new product growth for model consumer durables. Management Sci. 15(5):215–227.Link, Google Scholar
• Bernheim BD (1994) A theory of conformity. J. Political Econom. 102(5):841–877.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonacich P (1987) Power and centrality: A family of measures. Amer. J. Sociol. 92(5):1170–1182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bott H (1928) Observation of play activities in a nursery school. Genetic Psych. Monographs 4(1):44–88.Google Scholar
• Bramoullé Y, Djebbari H, Fortin B (2009) Identification of peer effects through social networks. J. Econometrics 150(1):41–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brancheau CJ, Wetherbe CJ (1990) The adoption of spreadsheet software: Testing innovation diffusion theory in the context of end-user computing. Inform. Systems Res. 1(2):115–143.Link, Google Scholar
• Broadcast Music Inc. (2009) BMI announces 2009 mobile music market projections. https://www.bmi.com/press/entry/538235/.Google Scholar
• Burkhardt ME (1994) Social interaction effects following a technological change: A longitudinal investigation. Acad. Management J. 37(4):869–898.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1982) Toward a Structural Theory of Action: Network Models of Social Structure, Perception, and Action, Quant. Stud. Soc. Relations (Academic Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1987) Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. Amer. J. Sociol. 92(6):1287–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterjee R, Eliashberg J (1990) The innovation diffusion process in a heterogeneous population: A micromodeling approach. Management Sci. 36(9):1057–1079.Link, Google Scholar
• Coleman JS (1958) Relational analysis: The study of social organization with survey methods. Human Organ. 17(4):28–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coleman JS, Katz E, Menzel H (1966) Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study (Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis).Google Scholar
• Doreian P (1982) Maximum likelihood methods for linear models: Spatial effects and spatial disturbance terms. Sociol. Methods Res. 10(3):243–269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doreian P (1989) Two regimes of network effects autocorrelation. Kochen M, ed. The Small World (Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ).Google Scholar
• Dunbar R (1992) Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. J. Human Evolution 20:469–493.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duncan OD, Haller AO, Portes A (1968) Peer influences on aspirations: A reinterpretation. Amer. J. Sociol. 74(2):119–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fang X, Hu P, Li Z, Tsai W (2013) Predicting adoption probabilities in social networks. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):128–145.Link, Google Scholar
• Fujimoto K, Valente TW (2012) Social network influences on adolescent substance use: Disentangling structural equivalence from cohesion. Soc. Sci. Medicine 74(12):1952–1960.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goolsbee A, Klenow PJ (2002) Evidence on learning and network externalities in the diffusion of home computers. J. Law Econom. 45:317–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanneke S, Fu W, Xing EP (2010) Discrete temporal models of social networks. Electronic J. Statist. 4:585–605.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanneman R, Riddle M (2005) Introduction to social network methods. University of California Riverside, http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/˜ hanneman/nettext/.Google Scholar
• Harkola J, Greve A (1995) Diffusion of technology: Cohesion or structural equivalence? Acad. Management Proc., 422–426.Google Scholar
• Kamakura WA, Russell GJ (1989) A probabilistic choice model for market segmentation and elasticity structure. J. Marketing Res. 26(4):379–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katona Z, Zubcsek PP, Sarvary M (2011) Network effects and personal influences: The diffusion of an online social network. J. Marketing Res. 48(3):425–443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Stern RN (1988) Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Soc. Psych. Quart. 51(2):123–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazarsfeld PF, Merton RK (1954) Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. Abel T, Page CH, eds. Freedom and Control in Modern Society (Van Nostrand, New York), 18–66.Google Scholar
• Leenders RT (1997) Longitudinal behavior of network structure and actor attributes: Modeling interdependence of contagion and selection. Doreian P, Stokman F, eds. Evolution of Social Networks (Routledge, Amsterdam), 165–184.Google Scholar
• Leenders RT (2002) Modeling social influence through network autocorrelation: Constructing the weight matrix. Soc. Networks 24:21–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leuven E, Sianesi B (2003) PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. Statistical Software Components S432001, Department of Economics, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA.Google Scholar
• Ma L, Krishnan R, Montgomery AL (2015) Latent homophily or social influence? An empirical analysis of purchase within a social network. Management Sci. 61(2):454–473.Link, Google Scholar
• Manski CF (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Rev. Econom. Stud. 60(3):531–542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manski CF (2000) Economic analysis of social interactions. J. Econom. Perspect. 14(3):115–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L (1987) Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 52(3):370–379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27:415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nair HS, Manchanda P, Bhatia T (2010) Asymmetric social interactions in physician prescription behavior: The role of opinion leaders. J. Marketing Res. 47(5):883–895.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oinas-Kukkonen H, Lyytinen K, Yoo Y (2010) Social networks and information systems: Ongoing and future research streams. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 11(2):62–67.Google Scholar
• Ord K (1975) Estimation methods for models of spatial interaction. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70(349):120–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Premkumar GRK, Nilakanta S (1994) Implementation of electronic data interchange: An innovation diffusion perspective. J. Management Inform. Systems 11(2):157–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robins G, Pattison P, Kalish Y, Lusher D (2007) An introduction to exponential random graph models for social networks. Soc. Networks 29(2):173–191.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rogers EM (1962) Diffusion of Innovations (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Rogers EM, Kincaid LD (1981) Communication Networks: Toward a New Paradigm for Research (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Salton G (1989) Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis and Retrieval of Information by Computer (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Shalizi CR, Thomas AC (2011) Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies. Sociol. Methods Res. 40(2):211–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shriver SK, Nair HS, Hofstetter R (2013) Social ties and user-generated content: Evidence from an online social network. Management Sci. 59(6):1425–1443.Link, Google Scholar
• Smith TE, LeSage JP (2004) A Bayesian probit model with spatial dependencies. Pace KR, LeSage JP, eds. Advances in Econometrics, Spatial Spatiotemporal Econometrics, Vol. 18 (Elsevier, Oxford, UK), 127–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Snijders TAB (2001) The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. Sobel ME, Becker MP, eds. Sociological Methodology—2001, Vol. 31 (Basil Blackwell, Boston), 361–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Snijders TAB, van Duijn MAJ (1997) Simulation for statistical inference in dynamic network models. Conte R, Hegselmann R, Terna P, eds. Simulating Social Phenomena (Springer, Berlin),493–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Snijders TAB, Koskinen JH, Schweinberger M (2010) Maximum likelihood estimation for social network dynamics. Ann. Appl. Statist. 4:567–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steglich C, Snijders TAB, West P (2006) Applying SIENA: An illustrative analysis of the coevolution of adolescents’ friendship networks, taste in music, and alcohol consumption. Methodology 2(1):48–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strang D, Tuma NB (1993) Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in diffusion. Amer. J. Sociol. 99(3):614–639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Susarla A, Oh JH, Tan Y (2012) Social networks and the diffusion of user-generated content: Evidence from YouTube. Inform. Systems Res. 23(1):23–41.Link, Google Scholar
• Trusov M, Bodapati AV, Bucklin RE (2010) Determining influential users in Internet social networks. J. Marketing Res. 47(4):643–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valente TW (2005) Models and methods for innovation diffusion. Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S, eds. Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 98–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Bulte C, Lilien GL (2001) Medical innovation revisited: Social contagion versus marketing effort. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(5):1409–1435.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang S, Allenby GM (2003) Modeling interdependent consumer preferences. J. Marketing Res. 40(3):282–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang B, Krackhardt D, Krishnan R, Doreian P (2011) An effective and efficient subpopulation extraction method in large social networks. ICIS 2011 Proc. 7. https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2011/proceedings/breakthroughideas/7.Google Scholar
• Zhang B, Thomas AC, Doreian P, Krackhardt D, Krishnan R (2013) Contrasting multiple social network autocorrelations for binary outcomes: With applications to technology adoption. ACM Trans. Management Inform. Systems 3(4):1–21.Google Scholar