Can Random Friends Seed More Buzz and Adoption? Leveraging the Friendship Paradox

References

• Andrews I, Gentzkow M, Shapiro JM (2017) Measuring the sensitivity of parameter estimates to estimation moments. Quart. J. Econom. 132(4):1553–1592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aral S, Van Alstyne M (2011) The diversity-bandwidth trade-off. Amer. J. Sociol. 117(1):90–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banerjee A, Chandrasekhar AG, Duflo E, Jackson MO (2013) The diffusion of microfinance. Science 341(6144):1236498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banerjee A, Chandrasekhar AG, Duflo E, Jackson MO (2014) Gossip: Identifying central individuals in a social network. NBER Working Paper No. 20422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Ben Sliman M, Kohli R (2018) Asymmetric relations and the friendship paradox. Columbia Business School Research Paper 18-73, New York.Google Scholar
• Berger J, Iyengar R (2013) Communication channels and word of mouth: How the medium shapes the message. J. Consumer Res. 40(3):567–579.Google Scholar
• Bonacich P (1987) Power and centrality: A family of measures. Amer. J. Sociol. 92(5):1170–1182.Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Mehra A, Brass DJ, Labianca G (2009) Network analysis in the social sciences. Science 323(5916):892–895.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cai J, De Janvry A, Sadoulet E (2015) Social networks and the decision to insure. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 7(2):81–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell A, Mayzlin D, Shin J (2017) Managing buzz. RAND J. Econom. 48(1):203–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Centola D (2010) The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science 329(5996):1194–1197.Google Scholar
• Centola D, Macy M (2007) Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(3):702–734.Google Scholar
• Chen X, van der Lans R, Phan TQ (2017) Uncovering the importance of relationship characteristics in social networks: Implications for seeding strategies. J. Marketing Res. 54(2):187–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chin A, Eckles D, Ugander J (2022) Evaluating stochastic seeding strategies in networks. Management Sci. 68(3):1714–1736.Link, Google Scholar
• Christakis NA, Fowler JH (2010) Social network sensors for early detection of contagious outbreaks. PLoS One 5(9):e12948.Google Scholar
• Cohen R, Havlin S, Ben-Avraham D (2003) Efficient immunization strategies for computer networks and populations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91(24):247901.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Domingos P, Richardson M (2001) Mining the network value of customers. Provost F, Ramakrishnan S, eds. Proc. 7th ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 57–66.Google Scholar
• Eckles D, Esfandiari H, Mossel E, Rahimian MA (2019) Seeding with costly network information. Karlin A, Immorlica N, Johari R, eds. Proc. 2019 ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 421–422.Google Scholar
• Feld SL (1991) Why your friends have more friends than you do. Amer. J. Sociol. 96(6):1464–1477.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godes D, Mayzlin D (2009) Firm-created word-of-mouth communication: Evidence from a field test. Marketing Sci. 28(4):721–739.Google Scholar
• Goldenberg J, Han S, Lehmann DR, Hong JW (2009) The role of hubs in the adoption process. J. Marketing 73(2):1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyengar R, Van den Bulte C, Valente TW (2011) Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Sci. 30(2):195–212.Link, 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
• Kempe D, Kleinberg J, Tardos É (2003) Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. Getoor L, Senator T, Domingos P, Faloutsos C, eds. Proc. 9th ACM SIGKDD Internat. Conf. Knowledge Discovery Data Mining (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 137–146.Google Scholar
• Kim DA, Hwong AR, Stafford D, Hughes DA, O’Malley AJ, Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2015) Social network targeting to maximise population behaviour change: A cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 386(9989):145–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King CW, Summers JO (1970) Overlap of opinion leadership across consumer product categories. J. Marketing Res. 7(1):43–50.Google Scholar
• Kumar V, Krackhardt D, Feld S (2024) On the friendship paradox and dinversity: A network property with applications to privacy-sensitive network interventions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 121(30):e2306412121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Libai B, Muller E, Peres R (2013) Decomposing the value of word-of-mouth seeding programs: Acceleration vs. expansion. J. Marketing Res. 50(2):161–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paluck EL, Shepherd H, Aronow PM (2016) Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113(3):566–571.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rubin DB (2005) Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 100(469):322–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stark TH (2018) Collecting social network data. The Palgrave Handbook of Survey Research (Springer, Berlin), 241–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stephen AT, Lehmann DR (2016) How word-of-mouth transmission encouragement affects consumers’ transmission decisions, receiver selection, and diffusion speed. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 33(4):755–766.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 den Bulte C, Lilien GL (2001) Medical innovation revisited: Social contagion vs. marketing effort. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(5):1409–1435.Google Scholar
• Wilder B, Immorlica N, Rice E, Tambe M (2018) Influence maximization with unknown network structure. McIlraith SA, Weinberger KQ, eds. Artificial Intelligence and Social Work (Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Washington, DC), 77.Google Scholar
• Yoganarasimhan H (2012) Impact of social network structure on content propagation: A study using youtube data. Quant. Marketing Econom. 10(1):111–150.Crossref, Google Scholar