Date: 29 Sep 2011
Impact of social network structure on content propagation: A study using YouTube data
- Hema Yoganarasimhan
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
We study how the size and structure of the local network around a node affects the aggregate diffusion of products seeded by it. We examine this in the context of YouTube, the popular video-sharing site. We address the endogeneity problems common to this setting by using a rich dataset and a careful estimation methodology. We empirically demonstrate that the size and structure of an author’s local network is a significant driver of the popularity of videos seeded by her, even after controlling for observed and unobserved video characteristics, unobserved author characteristics, and endogenous network formation. Our findings are distinct from those in the peer effects literature, which examines neighborhood effects on individual behavior, since we document the causal relationship between a node’s local network position and the global diffusion of products seeded by it. Our results provide guidelines for identifying seeds that provide the best return on investment, thereby aiding managers conducting buzz marketing campaigns on social media forums. Further, our study sheds light on the other substantive factors that affect video consumption on YouTube.
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2001). A theory of political transition. The American Economic Review, 91(4), 938–963.CrossRef
Anderson, T. W., & Hsaio, C. (1981). Estimation of dynamic models with error components. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76(375), 598–606.CrossRef
Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277–97.CrossRef
Bandeira, O., & Rasul, I. (2006). Social networks and technology adoption in Northern Mozambique. The Economic Journal, 116, 869–902.CrossRef
Bandiera, O., Barankay, I., & Rasul, I. (2009). Social connections and incentives in the workplace: evidence from personnel data. Econometrica., 77, 1047–94.CrossRef
Barabasi, A. L., Albert, R., & Jeong, H. (2000). Scale-free characteristics of random networks: the topology of the world wide web. Physica A, 281, 69–77.CrossRef
Barry, K. (2009). Ford bets the fiesta on social networking. Wired.
Bass, F. M. (1969). A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science, 15, 215–227.CrossRef
Bertrand, M., Luttmer, E. F. P., & Mullainathan, S. (2000). Network effects and welfare cultures. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 1019–1056.CrossRef
Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictionsin dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics., 87, 115–43.CrossRef
Borgatti, S. P. G., Jones, C., & Everett, M. G. (1998). Network measures of social capital. Connections, 21, 27–36.
Borgatti, S. P., Carley, K. M., & Krackhardt, D. (2006). On the robustness of centrality measures under conditions of imperfect data. Social Networks, 28, 124–136.CrossRef
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2006). A graph-theoretic perspective on centrality. Social Networks, 28, 466–84.CrossRef
Bramoullé, Y., Djebbari, H., & Fortin, B. (2009). Identification of peer effects through social networks. Journal of Econometrics., 150, 41–55.CrossRef
Brock, W. A., & Durlauf, S. N. (2007). Identification of binary choice models with social interactions. Journal of Econometrics, 140(1), 52–75.CrossRef
Burt, R. (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.
Clark, C. C., Doraszelski, U., & Draganska, M. (2009). The effect of advertising on brand awareness and perceived quality: an empirical investigation using panel data. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 7, 207–236.CrossRef
Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. (1966). Medical innovation: A diffusion study. Indianapolis: Bobb-Merrill.
Durlauf, S., Johnson, P., & Temple, J. (2005). Growth econometrics. In P. Aghion & S. Durlauf (Eds.), Handbook of econometric growth (Vol. 1A, pp. 555–677). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (2005). Ego-network betweenness. Social Networks, 27(1), 31–38.CrossRef
Feed Company. (2008). Viral video marketing survey: The agency perspective.
Feld, S. L. (1991). Why your friends have more friends than you do. The American Journal of Sociology, 96(6), 1464–77.CrossRef
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: a conceptual clarification. Social Networks. pp. 1–21.
Friedkin, N. E. (1991). Theoretical foundations for centrality measures. The American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1478–1504.CrossRef
Greenberg, K. (2010). Ford fiesta movement shifts into high gear. Marketing Daily.
Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 99(12), 7821–26.CrossRef
Goldenberg, J., Sangman, H., Lehmann, D. R., & Hong, J. W. (2009). The role of hubs in the adoption process. Journal of Marketing, 73, 1–13.CrossRef
Gould, R. V., & Fernandez, R. M. (1989). Structures of mediation: A formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks. In C. C. Clogg & A. Arbor (Eds.), Sociological methodology (pp. 89–126). MI: Blackwell.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–80.CrossRef
Hansen, B. E. (2008). Econometrics. available at: http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~bhansen/econometrics/Econometrics2008.pdf.
Hartmann, W. R., Manchanda, P., Nair, H., Bothner, M., Dodds, P., Godes, D., et al. (2008). Modeling social interactions: identification, empirical methods and policy implications. Marketing Letters, 19(3).
Hitwise Experian. (2010). Top 20 sites and engines. available at: http://www.hitwise.com/us/datacenter/main/.
Katona, Z., Zubcsek, P. P., & Sarvary, M. (2009). Network effects and personal influences: Diffusion of an online social network. Working paper.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Glencoe: Free.
Mahajan, V., Muller, E., & Wind, Y. (2000). New product diffusion models: From theory to practice. In V. Majan, E. Muller, & Y. Wind (Eds.), New product diffusion models. Boston: Kluwer.
Manski, C. F. (1993). Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. The Review of Economic Studies, 60(3), 531–42.CrossRef
McCracken, G. (2010). How Ford got social marketing right. The Conversation, Harvard Business Review.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.
Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K., Druschel, P., & Bhattacharjee, B. (2007). Measurement and Analysis of Online Social Networks. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM/USENIX Internet Measurement Conference, San Diego, CA.
Moynihan, R. (2008). Key opinion leaders: independent experts or drug representatives in disguise. British Medical Journal, 336, 1402–03.CrossRef
Nair, H., Manchanda, P., & Bhatia, T. (2009). Asymmetric social interactions in physician prescription behavior: The role of opinion leaders. Working paper.
Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 39, 359–87.
Nielson Online. (2010). Nielsen net ratings April 2010.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free.
Sacerdote, B. (2001). Peer effects with random assignment: results for Dartmouth roommates. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 681–704.CrossRef
Stephen A. T., & Toubia, O. (2010). Deriving value from social commerce networks. forthcoming Journal of Marketing Research.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Tauchen, G. (1986). Statistical properties of generalized method of moments estimators of structural parameters obtained from financial market data. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 4(4), 397–416.CrossRef
Trogdon, J., Nonnemaker, J., & Pais, J. (2008). Peer effects in adolescent overweight. Journal of Health Economics, 27(5), 1388–1399.CrossRef
Tucker, C. (2008). Identifying formal and informal influence in technology adoption with network externalities. Management Science, 55(12), 2024–2039.CrossRef
Valente, T. W., & Pumpuang, P. (2007). Identifying opinion leaders to promote behavior changes. Health Education & Behavior, 34, 881–96.CrossRef
Watts, D. J., & Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 441–58.CrossRef
Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘Small-World’ networks. Nature, 393(4), 440–42.CrossRef
Windmeijer, F. (2005). A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 126(1), 25–51.CrossRef
Woolridge, J. (2008). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. 4th ed., South-Western College Pub.
Ziliak, J. P. (1997). Efficient estimation with panel data when instruments are predetermined: an empirical comparison of moment-condition estimators. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 15(4), 419–31.CrossRef
- Impact of social network structure on content propagation: A study using YouTube data
Quantitative Marketing and Economics
Volume 10, Issue 1 , pp 111-150
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Social network
- Social media
- User-generated content
- Network structure
- Online video
- Social influence
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Graduate School of Management, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA