Direct and Indirect Spillovers from Content Providers’ Switching: Evidence from Online Livestreaming

References

• Adamic LA, Huberman BA, Barabási A-L, Albert R, Jeong H, Bianconi G (2000) Power-law distribution of the world wide web. Sci. 287(5461):2115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Karahanna E (2000) Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 24(4):665–694.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal CC, Yu PS (2012) On the network effect in Web 2.0 applications. Electronic Commerce Res. Appl. 11(2):142–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58(2):277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakshy E, Hofman JM, Mason WA, Watts DJ (2011) Everyone’s an influencer: Quantifying influence on twitter. Proc. Fourth ACM Internat. Conf. Web Search Data Mining (ACM Press, New York), 65–74.Google Scholar
• Blum EK, Iverson K (2006) A programming language. Amer. Math. Monthly 71(10):1146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J. Econometrics 87(1):115–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borah A, Tellis GJ (2016) Halo (spillover) effects in social media: Do product recalls of one brand hurt or help rival brands? J. Marketing Res. 53(2):143–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowman D, Gatignon H (1996) Order of entry as a moderator of the effect of the marketing mix on market share. Marketing Sci. 15(3):222–242.Link, Google Scholar
• Brechman J, Bellman S, Robinson JA, Rask A, Varan D (2016) Limited-interruption advertising in digital-video content: An analysis compares the effects of ‘midroll’ vs. ‘preroll’ spots and clutter advertising. J. Advertising Res. 56(3):289–298.Google Scholar
• Carpenter GS, Nakamoto K (1990) Competitive strategies for late entry into a market with a dominant brand. Management Sci. 36(10):1268–1278.Link, Google Scholar
• Cennamo C, Santalo J (2013) Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management J. 34(11):1331–1350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cheung G, Huang J (2011) Starcraft from the stands. Proc. 2011 Annual Conf. Human Factors Comput. Systems (ACM Press, New York), 763.Google Scholar
• Choudary SP (2014) Reverse network effects: Why today’s social networks can fail as they grow larger. Accessed September 17, 2020, https://www.wired.com/insights/2014/03/reverse-network-effects-todays-social-networks-can-fail-grow-larger/.Google Scholar
• Chu J, Manchanda P (2016) Quantifying cross and direct network effects in online consumer-to-consumer platforms. Marketing Sci. 35(6):870–893.Link, Google Scholar
• Chung S, Cho H (2017) Fostering parasocial relationships with celebrities on social media: Implications for celebrity endorsement. Psych. Marketing 34(4):481–495.Google Scholar
• Cohen J (2002) Television viewing preferences: Programs, schedules, and the structure of viewing choices made by Israeli adults. J. Broadcasting Electronic Media 46(2):204–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Reuver M, Sørensen C, Basole RC (2018) The digital platform: A research agenda. J. Inform. Tech. 33(2):124–135.Google Scholar
• Doughty M, Rowland D, Lawson S (2011) Co-viewing live TV with digital backchannel streams. Proc. Ninth Eur. Interactive TV Conf. (ACM Press, New York), 141–144.Google Scholar
• Eisenmann TR (2006) Internet companies’ growth strategies: Determinants of investment intensity and long-term performance. Strategic Management J. 27(12):1183–1204.Google Scholar
• Evans DS (2003) Some empirical aspects of multi-sided platform industries. Rev. Network Econom. 2(3):191–209.Google Scholar
• Fershtman C, Gandal N (2011) Direct and indirect knowledge spillovers: The social network of open-source projects. RAND J. Econom. 42(1):70–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallant AR, Hong H, Khwaja A (2017) The dynamic spillovers of entry: An application to the generic drug industry. Management Sci. 64(3):1189–1211.Link, Google Scholar
• Goodhardt GJ (1966) Constant in duplicated television viewing. Nature 212(5070):1616–1616.Google Scholar
• Hale J (2018) Here’s a candid breakdown of exactly how much money Twitch streamers earn per month. Tubefilter Online (August 10), https://www.tubefilter.com/2018/10/10/twitch-streamers-earn-per-month-breakdown-disguisedtoast/.Google Scholar
• Haviv A, Huang Y, Li N (2020) Intertemporal demand spillover effects on video game platforms. Management Sci. 66(10):4788–4807.Link, Google Scholar
• Headen RS, Klompmaker JE, Rust RT (1979) The duplication of viewing law and television media schedule evaluation. J. Marketing Res. 16(3):333–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hernandez P (2018) The Twitch streamers who spend years broadcasting to no one. The Verge Online (July 16), https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17569520/twitch-streamers-zero-viewers-motivation-community.Google Scholar
• Huang Y, Singh PV, Ghose A (2015) A structural model of employee behavioral dynamics in enterprise social media. Management Sci. 61(12):2825–2844.Link, Google Scholar
• Joe DY, Oh FD (2018) Spillover effects within business groups: The case of Korean Chaebols. Management Sci. 64(3):1396–1412.Link, Google Scholar
• Katz ML, Shapiro C (1985) Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(3):424–440.Google Scholar
• Kaytoue M, Silva A, Cerf L, Meira W, Raïssi C (2012) Watch me playing, I am a professional. Proc. 21st Internat. Conf. Companion World Wide Web (ACM Press, New York), 1181–1188.Google Scholar
• Kim J, Merrill K, Collins C (2020) Touchdown together: Social TV viewing and social presence in a physical co-viewing context. Soc. Sci. J. 28(1):291–305.Google Scholar
• Kingma BR (1989) An accurate measurement of the crowd-out effect, income effect, and price effect for charitable contributions. J. Political Econom. 97(5):1197–1207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krijestorac H, Garg R, Mahajan V (2020) Cross-platform spillover effects in consumption of viral content: A quasi-experimental analysis using synthetic controls. Inform. Systems Res. 31(2):449–472.Link, Google Scholar
• Ksiazek TB (2011) A network analytic approach to understanding cross-platform audience behavior. J. Media Econom. 24(4): 237–251.Google Scholar
• Kwark Y, Lee GM, Pavlou PA, Qiu L (2021) On the spillover effects of online product reviews on purchases: Evidence from clickstream data. Inform. Systems Res. 32(3):895–913.Link, Google Scholar
• Lee G (2005) Direct vs. indirect international R&D spillovers. Inform. Econom. Policy 17(3):334–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Z, Kaafar M, Salamatian K, Xie G (2016) Characterizing and modeling user behavior in a large-scale mobile live streaming system. IEEE Trans. Circuits Systems Video Tech. 27(12):2675–2686.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Libai B, Muller E, Peres R (2009) The role of within-brand and cross-brand communications in competitive growth. J. Marketing 73(3):19–34.Google Scholar
• Llanes G, Mantovani A, Ruiz-Aliseda F (2019) Entry into complementary good markets with network effects. Strategy Sci. 4(4):262–282.Link, Google Scholar
• Lu S, Yang S (2017) Investigating the spillover effect of keyword market entry in sponsored search advertising. Marketing Sci. 36(6):976–998.Link, Google Scholar
• Luo X, Zhang J (2013) How do consumer buzz and traffic in social media marketing predict the value of the firm? J. Management Inform. Systems 30(2):213–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luo X, Gu B, Zhang J, Phang CW (2017) Expert blogs and consumer perceptions of competing brands. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 41(2):371–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MarketWatch (2020) Live streaming market size report 2020 including market dynamics, drivers, restraints, opportunities and forecast to 2026. Accessed October 10, 2020, https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/live-streaming-market-size-report-2020-including-market-dynamics-drivers-restraints-opportunities-and-forecast-to-2026-2020-07-26.Google Scholar
• McDowell W, Sutherland J (2000) Choice vs. chance: Using brand equity theory to explore TV audience lead-in effects, a case study. J. Media Econom. 13(4):233–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McIntyre DP, Srinivasan A (2017) Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management J. 38(1):141–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton R (1968) Matthew effect in science. Sci. 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Munnukka J, Maity D, Reinikainen H, Luoma-aho V (2019) “Thanks for watching”: The effectiveness of YouTube Vlog endorsements. Comput. Human Behav. 93:226–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nam KJ, Kwon Y (2015) How important are real-time communications in TV watching? A case of AfreecaTV in Korea. 26th Eur. Regional Conf. Internat. Telecommunications Soc.Google Scholar
• Osborne J (2008) Best practices in data transformation: The overlooked effect of minimum values. Osborne J, ed. Best Practices in Quantitative Methods (Sage Publications, Inc.), 197–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S (2004) Quantitative analysis of network externalities in competing technologies: The VCR case. Rev. Econom. Statist. 86(4):937–945.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker P, Gatignon H (1994) Specifying competitive effects in diffusion models: An empirical analysis. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 11(1):17–39.Google Scholar
• Perez S (2019) Twitch launches a four-person ‘squad stream’ feature to help creators get discovered. Techcrunch Online (March 27), https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/27/twitch-launches-a-four-person-squad-stream-feature-to-help-creators-get-discovered/.Google Scholar
• Reilly CF, Salinas D, De Leon D (2014) Ranking users based on influence in a directional social network. Internat. Conf. Comput. Sci. Comput. Intelligence (IEEE, Las Vegas), 237–240.Google Scholar
• Reiss K (2016) Support Twitch small streamers. Accessed November 11, 2020, https://www.theodysseyonline.com/support-twitch-small-streamers.Google Scholar
• Rochet JC, Tirole J (2003) Platform competition in two-sided markets. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 1(4):990–1029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rutherford D (2013) Routledge Dictionary of Economics, 3rd ed. (Routledge, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sabnis G, Grewal R (2015) Cable news wars on the internet: The competitive influence of user-generated content. Inform. Systems Res. 26(2):301–319.Link, Google Scholar
• Salganik MJ, Dodds PS, Watts DJ (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Sci. 311(5762):854–856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling MA (2002) Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: The impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Acad. Management J. 45(2):387–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shankar V, Bayus BL (2003) Network effects and competition: An empirical analysis of the home video game industry. Strategic Management J. 24(4):375–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shocker AD, Bayus BL, Kim N (2004) Product complements and substitutes in the real world: The relevance of “other products.” J. Marketing 68(1):28–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sjöblom M, Hamari J (2017) Why do people watch others play video games? An empirical study on the motivations of Twitch users. Comput. Human Behav. 75(C):985–996.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorensen AT (2007) Bestseller lists and product variety. J. Indust. Econom. 55(4):715–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stephen B (2020) The lockdown live-streaming numbers are out, and they’re huge. The Verge. Accessed October 10, 2020, https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/13/21257227/coronavirus-streamelements-arsenalgg-twitch-youtube-livestream-numbers.Google Scholar
• StreamElements (2021) State of the stream—2021 year in review. by Chase, StreamElements—Legendary content creation tools and services. Accessed November 13, 2020, https://blog.streamelements.com/state-of-the-stream-2021-year-in-review-4a7074439829.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
• Tucker C (2008) Identifying formal and informal influence in technology adoption with network externalities. Management Sci. 54(12):2024–2038.Link, Google Scholar
• Van De Rijt A, Kang SM, Restivo M, Patil A (2014) Field experiments of success-breeds-success dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(19):6934–6939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster JG (1985) Program audience duplication: A study of television inheritance effects. J. Broadcasting Electronic Media 29(2):121–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster JG, Ksiazek TB (2012) The dynamics of audience fragmentation: Public attention in an age of digital media. J. Comm. 62(1):39–56.Google Scholar
• Webster JG, Wakshlag JJ (1983) A theory of television program choice. Comm. Res. 10(4):430–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilbur KC (2008) A two-sided, empirical model of television advertising and viewing markets. Marketing Sci. 27(3):356–378.Link, Google Scholar
• Wonneberger A, Schoenbach K, van Meurs L (2009) Dynamics of individual television viewing behavior: Models, empirical evidence, and a research program. Comm. Stud. 60(3):235–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu X, Zhang F, Zhou Y (2021) Brand spillover as a marketing strategy. Management Sci. 68(7):4755–5555.Google Scholar
• Yoo E, Gu B, Rabinovich E (2019) Diffusion on social media platforms: A point process model for interaction among similar content. J. Management Inform. Systems 36(4):1105–1141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang K, Zubcsek PP (2011) Community leaders or entertainment workers? Incentivizing content generation in social media. Preprint, submitted June 2, 2011, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1856442.Google Scholar
• Zhang K, Evgeniou T, Padmanabhan V, Richard E (2012a) Content contributor management and network effects in a UGC environment. Marketing Sci. 31(3):433–447.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Mo J, He T (2012b) User influence analysis on micro blog. IEEE Second Internat. Conf. Cloud Comput. Intelligence Systems (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1474–1478.Google Scholar
• Zhao K, Hu Y, Hong Y, Westland JC (2021) Understanding characteristics of popular streamers on live streaming platforms: Evidence from Twitch.tv. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 22(4):1076–1098.Google Scholar
• Zhao Q, Der Chen C, Cheng HW, Wang JL (2018) Determinants of live streamers’ continuance broadcasting intentions on Twitch: A self-determination theory perspective. Telematics Informatics 35(2):406–420.Crossref, Google Scholar