Spreading in Social Systems: Reflections

  • Sune LehmannEmail author
  • Yong-Yeol Ahn
Part of the Computational Social Sciences book series (CSS)


In this final chapter, we consider the state-of-the-art for spreading in social systems and discuss the future of the field. As part of this reflection, we identify a set of key challenges ahead. The challenges include the following questions: how can we improve the quality, quantity, extent, and accessibility of datasets? How can we extract more information from limited datasets? How can we take individual cognition and decision-making processes into account? How can we incorporate other complexity of the real contagion processes? Finally, how can we translate research into positive real-world impact? In the following, we provide more context for each of these open questions.


  1. 1.
    Salganik MJ (2017) Bit by bit: social research in the digital age. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stopczynski A, Sekara V, Sapiezynski P, Cuttone A, Larsen JE, Lehmann S (2014) Measuring large-scale social networks with high resolution. PLoS One 9(4):e95978CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kramer AD, Guillory JE, Hancock JT (2014) Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111(24):8788–8790CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bond RM, Fariss CJ, Jones JJ, Kramer ADI, Marlow C, Settle JE, Fowler JH (2012) A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature 489(7415):295–298CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Narayanan A, Shmatikov V (2008) Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets. In: IEEE symposium on security and privacy, 2008. SP 2008. IEEE, New York, pp 111–125Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Narayanan A, Shi E, Rubinstein BIP (2011) Link prediction by de-anonymization: how we won the kaggle social network challenge. In: The 2011 international joint conference on neural networks (IJCNN). IEEE, New York, pp 1825–1834Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Christakis NA, Fowler JH (2007) The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. New Engl J Med 2007(357):370–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2008) Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the framingham heart study. Br Med J 337:a2338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christakis NA, Fowler JH (2008) The collective dynamics of smoking in a large social network. New Engl J Med 358(21):2249–2258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cacioppo JT, Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2009) Alone in the crowd: the structure and spread of loneliness in a large social network. J Pers Soc Psychol 97(6):977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aral S, Muchnik L, Sundararajan A (2009) Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(51):21544–21549CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shalizi CR, Thomas AC (2011) Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies. Sociol Methods Res 40(2):211–239MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lyons R (2011) The spread of evidence-poor medicine via flawed social-network analysis. Stat Polit Policy 2(1).
  14. 14.
    Christakis NA, Fowler JH (2013) Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior. Stat Med 32(4):556–577MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rodriguez N, Bollen J, Ahn Y-Y (2016) Collective dynamics of belief evolution under cognitive coherence and social conformity. PLoS one 11(11):e0165910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weng L, Flammini A, Vespignani A, Menczer F (2012) Competition among memes in a world with limited attention. Sci Rep 2:335Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weng L, Menczer F, Ahn Y-Y (2013) Virality prediction and community structure in social networks. Sci Rep 3:2522Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roy DK, Pentland AP (2002) Learning words from sights and sounds: a computational model. Cogn Sci 26(1):113–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Snijders TAB, Steglich CEG, Schweinberger M (2007) Modeling the co-evolution of networks and behavior. In: van Montfort K, Oud H, Satorra A (eds) Longitudinal models in the behavioral and related sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum, p 41–71Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gross T, Blasius B (2008) Adaptive coevolutionary networks: a review. J R Soc. Interface 5(20):259–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Howard P, Bradshaw P (2017) Troops, trolls and troublemakers: a global inventory of organized social media manipulation. Oxford internet institute working paperGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    King G, Pan J, Roberts ME (2017) How the chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. Am Polit Sci Rev 111(3):484–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark
  2. 2.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations