Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter

In this paper we investigate the attributes and relative influence of 1.6M Twitter users by tracking 74 million diffusion events that took place on the Twitter follower graph over a two month interval in 2009. Unsurprisingly, we find that the largest cascades tend to be generated by users who have been influential in the past and who have a large number of followers. We also find that URLs that were rated more interesting and/or elicited more positive feelings by workers on Mechanical Turk were more likely to spread. In spite of these intuitive results, however, we find that predictions of which particular user or URL will generate large cascades are relatively unreliable. We conclude, therefore, that word-of-mouth diffusion can only be harnessed reliably by targeting large numbers of potential influencers, thereby capturing average effects. Finally, we consider a family of hypothetical marketing strategies, defined by the relative cost of identifying versus compensating potential "influencers." We find that although under some circumstances, the most influential users are also the most cost-effective, under a wide range of plausible assumptions the most cost-effective performance can be realized using "ordinary influencers"---individuals who exert average or even less-than-average influence.

[1]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[2]  Duncan J Watts,et al.  A simple model of global cascades on random networks , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Aniket Kittur,et al.  Crowdsourcing user studies with Mechanical Turk , 2008, CHI.

[4]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  The dynamics of viral marketing , 2005, EC '06.

[5]  D. Watts,et al.  Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation , 2007 .

[6]  Rizal Setya Perdana What is Twitter , 2013 .

[7]  Eric Sun,et al.  Gesundheit! Modeling Contagion through Facebook News Feed , 2009, ICWSM.

[8]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications , 1956 .

[9]  Robyn M. Dawes,et al.  Everyday Irrationality: How Pseudo- Scientists, Lunatics, And The Rest Of Us Systematically Fail To Think Rationally , 2001 .

[10]  Karen Rose,et al.  What is Twitter , 2009 .

[11]  D. Meadows-Klue The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference , 2004 .

[12]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[13]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Presenting diverse political opinions: how and how much , 2010, CHI.

[14]  Brendan T. O'Connor,et al.  Cheap and Fast – But is it Good? Evaluating Non-Expert Annotations for Natural Language Tasks , 2008, EMNLP.

[15]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  Discovering leaders from community actions , 2008, CIKM '08.

[16]  D. Watts,et al.  Viral Marketing for the Real World Duncan J. Watts, Jonah Peretti, and Michael Frumin , 2007 .

[17]  Siddharth Suri,et al.  Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[18]  Jerker Denrell,et al.  Vicarious Learning, Undersampling of Failure, and the Myths of Management , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[19]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Financial incentives and the "performance of crowds" , 2009, HCOMP '09.

[20]  Michael Kearns,et al.  Competitive contagion in networks , 2011, STOC '12.

[21]  R. Berk An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data. , 1983 .

[22]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[23]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  6. Katz, E. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications , 1956 .

[24]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Tracing information flow on a global scale using Internet chain-letter data , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[26]  D. Watts,et al.  Viral marketing for the real world , 2007 .

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

[28]  J. Goldenberg,et al.  The Role of Hubs in the Adoption Process , 2009 .

[29]  R. Goldsmith The Influentials: One American in Ten Tells the Other Nine How to Vote, Where to Eat, and What to Buy , 2004 .

[30]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Social influence and the diffusion of user-created content , 2009, EC '09.

[31]  Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis,et al.  Get another label? improving data quality and data mining using multiple, noisy labelers , 2008, KDD.

[32]  Ramanathan V. Guha,et al.  Information diffusion through blogspace , 2004, WWW '04.

[33]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Measuring User Influence in Twitter: The Million Follower Fallacy , 2010, ICWSM.

[34]  Alex Leavitt,et al.  The Influentials : New Approaches for Analyzing Influence on Twitter , 2009 .

[35]  R. Dennis Cook,et al.  Cross-Validation of Regression Models , 1984 .

[36]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Tracking information epidemics in blogspace , 2005, The 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI'05).

[37]  Jerker Denrell Vicarious Learning, Undersampling of Failure, and the Myths of Management , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[38]  G. Weimann The Influentials: People Who Influence People , 1994 .

[39]  Qi He,et al.  TwitterRank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers , 2010, WSDM '10.

[40]  Brian Tomlinson,et al.  SARS: experience at Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong , 2003, The Lancet.