Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:14:52.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influencers, Backfire Effects, and the Power of the Periphery

from II - Early Foundations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2021

By
Damon Centola
Edited by
Mario L. Small ,
Brea L. Perry ,
Bernice Pescosolido  and
Edward B. Smith
Mario L. Small
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Brea L. Perry
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Bernice Pescosolido
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Edward B. Smith
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

How are people convinced to change their minds? What makes them switch to a new political candidate, decide to join a contentious social movement, or become willing to vote in an upcoming election?

Type
Chapter
Information
Personal Networks
Classic Readings and New Directions in Egocentric Analysis
 , pp. 73 - 86
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ancona, Deborah G., and Caldwell, David. 1992. “Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly 37: 634–65.Google Scholar
Bakshy, Etan, et al. 2009. “Social Influence and the Diffusion of User-Created Content.” In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 325–34. New York: Association of Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Barberá, Pablo et al. 2015. “The Critical Periphery in the Growth of Social Protests.” PLoS ONE 10(11): e0143611.Google Scholar
Beaman, Lori, et al. 2016. “Making Networks Work for Policy: Evidence from Agricultural Technology Adoption in Malawi.” Impact Evaluation Report 43. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation.Google Scholar
Becker, Joshua, et al. 2017. “Network Dynamics of Social Influence in the Wisdom of Crowds.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(26): E5070–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, Joshua, et al. 2019. “The Wisdom of Partisan Crowds.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(22): 10717–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blankenship, Elizabeth B., et al. 2018. “Sentiment, Contents, and Retweets: A Study of Two Vaccine-Related Twitter Datasets.” The Permanente Journal 22: 17–138.Google Scholar
Broniatowski, David, et al. 2018. “Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate.” American Journal of Public Health 108(10):1378–84.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon. 2010. “The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment.” Science 329(5996): 1194–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Centola, Damon. 2011. “An Experimental Study of Homophily in the Adoption of Health Behavior.” Science 334(6060): 1269–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centola, Damon. 2015. “The Social Origins of Networks and Diffusion.” American Journal of Sociology 120(5): 1295–338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centola, Damon. 2018. How Behavior Spreads. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon. 2019. “Influential Networks.” Nature Human Behavior 3: 1–2.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon. 2021. Change: How to Make Big Things Happen. New York: Little Brown, Spark.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon, and Arnout, van de Rijt. 2015. “Choosing Your Network: Social Preferences in an Online Health Community.” Social Science & Medicine 125: 19–31.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon, and Macy, Michael. 2007. “Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 113(3): 702–34.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon, et al. 2007. “Cascade Dynamics of Multiplex Propagation.” Physica A 374: 449–56.Google Scholar
Centola, Damon, et al. 2018. “Experimental Evidence for Tipping Points in Social Convention.” Science 360(6393): 1116–19.Google Scholar
Davis, Gerald, and Greve, Henrich R.. 1997. “Corporate Elite Networks and Governance Changes in the 1980s.” The American Journal of Sociology 103(1): 1–37.Google Scholar
Gladwell, Malcolm. 2000. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilbeault, Douglas, and Centola, Damon. 2020a. “Optimal Seeding Strategies for Social Contagions.” Working Paper, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Guilbeault, Douglas, and Centola, Damon. 2020b. “Networked Collective Intelligence Improves Dissemination of Scientific Information Regarding Smoking Risks.” PLoS ONE 15(2): e0227813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guilbeault, Douglas, et al. 2018a. “Complex Contagions: A Decade in Review.” In Complex Spreading Phenomena in Social Systems, edited by Ahn, Yong Yeol and Lehmann, Sune. New York: Springer Nature.Google Scholar
Guilbeault, Douglas, et al. 2018b. “Social Learning and Partisan Bias in the Interpretation of Climate Trends.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115(39): 9714–19.Google Scholar
Hansen, Morten T. 1999. “The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits.” Administrative Science Quarterly 44(1): 82–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, Lauren, and Monin, Benoît. 2017. “Healthier than Thou? ‘Practicing What You Preach’ Backfires by Increasing Anticipated Devaluation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 112(5): 735.Google Scholar
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Karsai, Márton, et al. 2016. “Local Cascades Induced Global Contagion: How Heterogeneous Thresholds, Exogenous Effects, and Unconcerned Behaviour Govern Online Adoption Spreading.” Scientific Reports 2016: 27178.Google Scholar
Katz, Elihu. 1957. “The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up-to-Date Report on an Hypothesis.” Public Opinion Quarterly 21: 61–78.Google Scholar
Katz, Elihu, and Lazarsfeld, Paul. 1955. Personal Influence. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Bernice R., et al. 2007. “African Americans and Their Distrust of the Health Care System: Healthcare for Diverse Populations.” Journal of Cultural Diversity 14(2): 56–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Kluchin, Rebecca. 2009. Fit to Be Tied: Sterilization and Reproductive Rights in America, 1950–1980. Rutgers: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Krackhardt, David. 1999. “The Ties that Torture: Simmelian Tie Analysis in Organizations.” Research in the Sociology of Organizations 16(1): 183–210.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Merton, Robert K.. 1954. “Friendship as a Social Process: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis.” Freedom and Control in Modern Society 18: 18–66.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul, et al. 1944. The People’s Choice. New York: Duell, Sloan & Pearce.Google Scholar
Mønsted, Bjarke, et al. 2017. “Evidence of Complex Contagion of Information in Social Media: An Experiment Using Twitter Bots.” PLoS ONE 12(9): e0184148.Google Scholar
Newman, Mark. 2010. Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Padgett, John F., and Ansell, Christopher K.. 1993. “Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434.” American Journal of Sociology 98(6): 1259–319.Google Scholar
Page, Scott E. 2007. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Reagans, Ray, and Bill, McEvily. 2003. “Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range.” Administrative Science Quarterly 48(2): 240–67.Google Scholar
Romero, Daniel, et al. 2011. “Differences in the Mechanics of Information Diffusion across Topics: Idioms, Political Hashtags, and Complex Contagion on Twitter.” In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 695–704. New York: Association of Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Samuelson, William, and Zeckhauser, Richard. 1988. “Status Quo Bias in Decision Making.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1: 7–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, Georg. 1955. Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sprague, Daniel, and House, Thomas. 2017. “Evidence for Complex Contagion Models of Social Contagion from Observational Data.” PLoS ONE 12(7): e0180802.Google Scholar
State, Bogdan, and Lada Adamic. 2015. “The Diffusion of Support in an Online Social Movement: Evidence from the Adoption of Equal-Sign Profile Pictures.” In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 1741–1750. New York: Association of Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Steinert-Threlkeld, Zachary C. 2017. “Spontaneous Collective Action: Peripheral Mobilization during the Arab Spring.” American Political Science Review 111(2): 379–403.Google Scholar
Toole, Jameson L. et al. 2012. “Modeling the Adoption of Innovations in the Presence of Geographic and Media Influences.” Plos One 7(1): e29528.Google Scholar
Traag, Vincent. 2016. “Complex Contagion of Campaign Donations.” PLoS One 11(4): e0153539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ugander, Johan, et al. 2012. “Structural Diversity in Social Contagion.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(16): 5962–6.Google Scholar
Vaan, Mathijs de, Vedres, Balazs, and Stark, David. 2015. “Game Changer: The Topology of Creativity.” American Journal of Sociology 120(4): 1144–94.Google Scholar
Wang, Xioachen, et al. 2019. “Anomalous Structure and Dynamics in News Diffusion among Heterogeneous Individuals.” Nature Human Behavior 3: 1–10.Google Scholar
Zhang, Jingwen, and Centola, Damon. 2019. “Social Networks and Health: New Developments in Diffusion, Online and Offline.” Annual Review of Sociology 45(1): 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×