Information diffusion and external influence in networks

Social networks play a fundamental role in the diffusion of information. However, there are two different ways of how information reaches a person in a network. Information reaches us through connections in our social networks, as well as through the influence external out-of-network sources, like the mainstream media. While most present models of information adoption in networks assume information only passes from a node to node via the edges of the underlying network, the recent availability of massive online social media data allows us to study this process in more detail. We present a model in which information can reach a node via the links of the social network or through the influence of external sources. We then develop an efficient model parameter fitting technique and apply the model to the emergence of URL mentions in the Twitter network. Using a complete one month trace of Twitter we study how information reaches the nodes of the network. We quantify the external influences over time and describe how these influences affect the information adoption. We discover that the information tends to "jump" across the network, which can only be explained as an effect of an unobservable external influence on the network. We find that only about 71% of the information volume in Twitter can be attributed to network diffusion, and the remaining 29% is due to external events and factors outside the network.

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

[2]  David Selbourne,et al.  Politics of Illusion , 1997 .

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

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

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

[6]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Sequential Influence Models in Social Networks , 2010, ICWSM.

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

[8]  M. Macy,et al.  Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties1 , 2007, American Journal of Sociology.

[9]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  Influence and correlation in social networks , 2008, KDD.

[10]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  Uncovering the Temporal Dynamics of Diffusion Networks , 2011, ICML.

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

[12]  W. Bennett News, the politics of illusion , 1983 .

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

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

[15]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Who says what to whom on twitter , 2011, WWW.

[16]  N. L. Johnson,et al.  Survival Models and Data Analysis , 1982 .

[17]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  What Stops Social Epidemics? , 2011, ICWSM.

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

[19]  Herbert W. Hethcote,et al.  The Mathematics of Infectious Diseases , 2000, SIAM Rev..

[20]  Sotiris Ioannidis,et al.  we.b: the web of short urls , 2011, WWW.

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

[22]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Cascading Behavior in Large Blog Graphs , 2007 .

[23]  E. Katz The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up-To-Date Report on an Hypothesis , 1957 .

[24]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle , 2009, KDD.

[25]  P. Lazarsfeld,et al.  The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign , 1968 .

[26]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter , 2011, WSDM '11.

[27]  Didier Sornette,et al.  Robust dynamic classes revealed by measuring the response function of a social system , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[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]  M. W. Riley Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications.Elihu Katz , Paul F. Lazarsfeld , 1956 .

[30]  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.