Leveraging Peer-to-Peer Networks in Pharmaceutical Marketing

  • Tulikaa Bhatia
Part of the International Series in Quantitative Marketing book series (ISQM, volume 20)


This chapter focuses on the identification of opinion leaders in physician networks as a substantial opportunity for pharmaceutical firms rethinking their business model, and looking for improving resource allocation in order to increase their return on investment. It points out the various challenges and the advantages of identifying regional opinion leaders, especially when it comes to sustained use of branded drugs marketed by pharmaceutical firms. It includes a basic overview of network structure and the formation of physician social networks. This is a growing area of importance for various disciplines such as epidemiology, sociology, economics, and marketing. In this chapter, the reader will get introduced to several models of physician social networks which help isolate and measure the effect of opinion leaders, both self-stated and those identified by patient referral data. The author points out the managerial implications of this stream of research and promising areas of opportunity for deeper analysis for this promising nascent research stream.


Opinion Leader Physician Network Market Leader Social Contagion Sales Force 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aral S (2011) Identifying social influence: a comment on opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Mark Sci 30(2):217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bala V, Goyal S (2000) A non-cooperative model of network formation. Econometrica 68:1181–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bass FM (1969) A new product growth model for consumer durables. Mark Sci 15(5):215–227Google Scholar
  4. Bell DR, Song S (2007) Social contagion and trial on the internet: evidence from online grocery retailing. Quant Mark Econ 5(4):361–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhatia T, Wang LK (2011) Identifying physician peer-to-peer effects using patient movement data. Int J Res Mark 28(1):51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blume LE (1993) The statistical mechanics of strategic interaction. Games Econ Behav 5(3):387–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brock WA, Durlauf SN (2001) Discrete choice with social interactions. Rev Econ Stud 68(4):235–260Google Scholar
  8. Brock WA, Durlauf SN (2002) A multinomial-choice model of neighborhood effects. Am Econ Rev 92(2):298–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burt RS (1987) Social contagion and innovation: cohesion versus structural equivalence. Am J Sociol 92(6):1287–1335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Celentano DD, Bond KC, Lyles CM, Trakul SE, L-Go VF, Beyrer C, Chiangmai C, Nelson KE, Khamboonruang C, Vaddhanaphuti C (2000) Preventive intervention to reduce sexually transmitted infections. Arch Intern Med 160(4):535–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chritakis NA, Fowler JH (2011) Contagion in prescribing behavior among network of doctors. Mark Sci 30(2):213–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coleman JS, Katz E, Menzel H (1966) Medical innovation: a diffusion study. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis, INGoogle Scholar
  13. Conley TG, Udry CR (2010) Learning about a new technology: pineapple in Ghana. Am Econ Rev 100(1):35–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dodds PS, Watts DJ (2004) Universal behavior in a generalized model of contagion. Phys Rev Lett 92:218701–218705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dodds PS, Watts DJ (2005) A generalized model of social and biological contagion. J Theor Biol 232:587–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dufflo E, Saez E (2003) The role of information and social interactions in retirement plan decisions: evidence from a randomized experiment. Q J Econ 118(3):815–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frank RH (1985) Choosing the right pond: human behavior and the quest for status. Oxford University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  18. Freeman LC (1978) Centrality in social networks—conceptual clarification. Soc Networks 19:209–222Google Scholar
  19. Godes D (2011) Invited comment on “opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion”. Mark Sci 30(2):224–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Godes D, Mayzlin D (2004) Firm-created word-of-mouth communication: a field-based quasiexperiment. HBS Marketing Research Paper No. 04–03. = 569361
  21. Goldstein J (2009) The long decline of drug sales reps. Wall Street Journal Health Blog, 23 Mar 2009Google Scholar
  22. Granovetter M (1978) Threshold models of collective behavior. Am J Sociol 83(6):1420–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Iyengar R, Valente T, Van den Bulte C (2011) Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Mark Sci 30(2):195–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lomas J, Enkin M, Anderson GM, Hannah WJ, Vadya E, Singer J (1991) Opinion leaders vs. audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. J Am Med Assoc 265(17):2202–2207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Manchanda P, Xie Y, Youn N (2008) The role of targeted communication and contagion in new product adoption. Mark Sci 27(6):961–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manski CF (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev Econ Stud 60(3):531–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McKee P (2010) Decline in pharma rep sales force: what pharmaceutical companies will do next. PHC Consulting. Accesssed 7 Apr 2010
  28. Nair H, Manchanda P, Bhatia T (2010) Asymmetric social interactions in physician prescription behavior: the role of opinion leaders. J Mark Res 47(5):883–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nam S, Manchanda P, Chintagunta PK (2010) The effects of service quality and word-of-mouth on customer acquisition, retention and usage. Mark Sci 29(4):690–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reingen PH, Kernan JB (1986) Analysis of referral networks in marketing: methods and illustration. J Mark Res 23(11):370–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sacerdote B (2001) Peer effects with random assignment: results for Dartmouth roommates. Q J Econ 116(2):681–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schelling T (1971) Dynamic models of segregation. J Math Sociol 1:143–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stokman FN (2001) Networks: social. International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam, pp 10509–10514Google Scholar
  34. Stremersch S, Van Dyke W (2009) Marketing of the life sciences: a new framework and research agenda for a nascent field. J Mark 73(7):1–42Google Scholar
  35. Stremersch S, Lehmann DR, Dekimpe MG (2010) Editorial: preface to “the chilling effect of network externalities”. Int J Res Mark 27(1):1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trusov M, Bodapati AV, Bucklin RV (2010) Determining influential users in internet social networks. J Mark Res 47(4):643–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Valente TH, Hoffman BR, Ritt-Olson A, Lichtman K, Johnson CA (2003) Effects of a social-network method for group assignment strategies on peer-led tobacco prevention programs in schools. Am J Public Health 93(11):1837–1843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van den Bulte C, Lilien GL (2001) Medical innovation revisited: social contagion versus marketing effort. Am J Sociol 106(5):1409–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wuyts S, Dekimpe M, Gijsbrechts E, Pieters R (2010) The connected customer: the changing nature of consumer and business markets. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Yang S, Allenby GM (2003) Modeling interdependent consumer preferences. J Mark Res 40(3):282–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rutgers Business School PhD, Marketing, Kellogg School of BusinessNorthwestern UniversityChicago in IllinoisUnited States

Personalised recommendations