Peer Influence in a Very Large Social Network: The Diffusion of the iPhone Handset

In this paper we analyze a large-scale comprehensive dataset from a major European Mobile Phone Provider (EURMO). This dataset allows us to study the diffusion of the iPhone 3G. We provide evidence of contagious adoption. We show that the propensity for iPhone 3G adoption increases with the number of individuals within the social network that have previously purchase the iPhone. We bound the impact of social influence to 14% of all iPhone 3G adoptions observed in EURMO. This result is obtained after controlling for social clustering, gender, previous adoption of mobile internet data plans and ownership of technologically advanced handsets as well as heterogeneity in the regions where subscribers move during the day and spend most of their evenings. This result shows that the effect of peer influence is not trivial and that targeted marketing campaigns to spread handset adoption over mobile networks might indeed be worth pursuing.

[1]  Anabela Botelho,et al.  The diffusion of cellular phones in Portugal , 2004 .

[2]  Noah E. Friedkin,et al.  A Structural Theory of Social Influence: List of Tables and Figures , 1998 .

[3]  Sougata Mukherjea,et al.  Social ties and their relevance to churn in mobile telecom networks , 2008, EDBT '08.

[4]  S. Raphael,et al.  School-Based Peer Effects and Juvenile Behavior , 1997, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[5]  Bin Zhang Machine.  EXTRACTING SUBPOPULATIONS FROM LARGE SOCIAL NETWORKS , 2011 .

[6]  R. Burt.  Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence , 1987, American Journal of Sociology.

[7]  P. Allison.  Discrete-Time Methods for the Analysis of Event Histories , 1982 .

[8]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Threshold Models of Collective Behavior , 1978, American Journal of Sociology.

[9]  Harald Gruber,et al.  Competition and Innovation: The Diffusion of Mobile Telecommunications in Central and Eastern Europe , 2000, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[10]  G. Lilien,et al.  Medical Innovation Revisited: Social Contagion versus Marketing Effort1 , 2001, American Journal of Sociology.

[11]  Effrosyni Adamopoulou.  Peer effects in young adults' marital decisions , 2012 .

[12]  Anita Elberse,et al.  The effectiveness of pre-release advertising for motion pictures: An empirical investigation using a simulated market , 2007, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[13]  Jeffrey M. Woodbridge.  Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2002 .

[14]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  The Influence of Familial and Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions , 1992 .

[15]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[16]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Systems Competition and Network Effects , 1994 .

[17]  Yousin Park,et al.  A Comparative Study on the Diffusion of Smartphones in Korea and Japan , 2011, 2011 IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet.

[18]  Frank M. Bass,et al.  A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[19]  G. Swann,et al.  Network effects and the choice of mobile phone operator , 2006 .

[20]  Mark Newman,et al.  Detecting community structure in networks , 2004 .

[21]  Sinan Aral,et al.  Identifying Social Influence: A Comment on Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion , 2010, Mark. Sci..

[22]  Christopher F. Baum,et al.  Enhanced Routines for Instrumental Variables/Generalized Method of Moments Estimation and Testing , 2007 .

[23]  J. Stock,et al.  Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments , 1994 .

[24]  Daniel Birke,et al.  Network Effects, network structure and consumer interaction in mobile telecommunications , 2010 .

[25]  C. Manski.  Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem , 1993 .

[26]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Specification Error in Probit Models , 1985 .

[27]  Cosma Rohilla Shalizi,et al.  Homophily and Contagion Are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies , 2010, Sociological methods & research.

[28]  Arun Sundararajan,et al.  Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Robert A. Peterson,et al.  Models for innovation diffusion , 1985 .

[30]  Ramayya Krishnan,et al.  Estimating the effect of word of mouth on churn and cross-buying in the mobile phone market with Markov logic networks , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[31]  David Strang,et al.  Adding Social Structure to Diffusion Models , 1991 .

[32]  Bernard Fortin,et al.  Identification of Peer Effects through Social Networks , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[33]  J. Coleman,et al.  Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. , 1967 .

[34]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Community Structure in Large Networks: Natural Cluster Sizes and the Absence of Large Well-Defined Clusters , 2008, Internet Math..

[35]  Roger Th. A. J. Leenders,et al.  Modeling social influence through network autocorrelation: constructing the weight matrix , 2002, Soc. Networks.

[36]  Y. Zenou,et al.  Dynamic Aspects of Teenage Friendships and Educational Attainment , 2011 .

[37]  Toker Doganoglu,et al.  Estimating network effects in mobile telephony in Germany , 2007, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[38]  Kathleen C. Schwartzman,et al.  DIFFUSION IN ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills , 2007 .

[39]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .