Harvard researchers underwhelmed by peer influence on Facebook - Bob Brown via NetworkWorld ⇢

Harvard researchers Kevin Lewis, Marco Gonzalez and Jason Kaufman published a paper called Social selection and peer influence in an online social network, and it seems to suggest that peers have a smaller influence on what we like than people may think:

Bob Brown via NetworkWorld

Using the Facebook data from a group of more than a thousand college students at one college, the researchers found that students whose music and movie tastes were similar were more likely to become friends or influence the formation of new friends, though book tastes were less of a factor in either case (maybe it would be different for older people, once the book club years kick in?).  The fact that music and movies tend to be more social activities probably has a bearing on their influence on friendships, the researchers write.  They found tastes in classical and jazz music were more likely to get passed along through friendships than tastes in indie/alternative music, where the aficionado of such music might be the sort to be the token indie/alt music lover in a group.

Devin Coldewey doesn’t buy this at all:

[…] the study is also clearly flawed in ways that those versed in social graphs are likely to easily perceive. Pulling useful data from social networks is like catching lightning in a bottle, and I wonder whether the findings may in fact be, as the study attempts to avoid, “a spurious consequence of alternative social processes.”

The central source of data for the study, in fact, doesn’t strike me as solid. Tracking the interests of college kids is a sketchy endeavor in and of itself, but tracking it via their Facebook favorites (i.e. what shows on your profile, not what you post about or share) seems unreliable.

After all, not only does everyone use the network in their own way, but the network itself has changed. Putting Wilco in your favorites is a different act from liking Wilco’s Facebook page, their official band site, or posting their latest video. Gauging someone’s interest in a movie or band by the favorites factor alone is inadequate. Their findings are essentially that taste doesn’t diffuse the way you might expect. But while the data support this, nothing supports the data.

Flattening huge sets of data and removing potentially conflative or distracting connections (“disentangling,” to use the researchers’ well-chosen word) is the bane of social research, and with a limited window on a huge field of data, like that these researchers had, it’s especially hard.

Who among these people was a supernode? What were their Twitter counts? What was the most common unit of interest? How many total posts, how many total favorite changes, how many total friends? The process of disentanglement only gets harder and harder, and the amount of indispensable data grows. The researchers have used advanced statistical techniques, but the data they were interpreting doesn’t seem to be at all complete.

The study does establish something that I think we perhaps understand is true already: you befriend people because of your overlaps in taste, but it’s rare that your existing friends change the tastes you already have. This is as much true out in the “real” world as it is online.

Coldewey is a bit off kilter with his general pronouncements about the difficulty of pulling factual information from social netwroks: they have been shown in many studies, for decades, to be immensely important predictors of health, happiness, trust, and a long list of other factors.

Still, I have to agree that since the results are so counterintuitive, it might be important to segregate friends from influencers. My hunch is that influence follows the power laws, and so unless you find the people that have super levels of influence — and see what strange gravity disturbances they cause — you might not think that there is anything going on at all.

21 December 2011 36 underpaidgenius
social networkspeer influenceinfluencerssupernodes

Notes

  1. luxury-brands reblogged this from emergentfutures
  2. rotlew reblogged this from emergentfutures
  3. helloimjay reblogged this from emergentfutures
  4. ast3v3nson reblogged this from emergentfutures and added:
    Thought provoking article
  5. is-tkg-outside-the-box reblogged this from emergentfutures and added:
    Yes—- there are many misconceptions but—- well most folks like…. Me and my fiends… Want out rage outs all night parties…...
  6. tomurich reblogged this from emergentfutures
  7. ideatrotter reblogged this from stoweboyd and added:
    Harvard researchers Kevin Lewis, Marco Gonzalez and Jason Kaufman published a paper called Social selection and peer...
  8. fiftyyrsoftech reblogged this from emergentfutures
  9. emergentfutures reblogged this from stoweboyd
  10. donovansung reblogged this from underpaidgenius
  11. This was featured in #Tech
  12. stoweboyd reblogged this from underpaidgenius and added:
    Harvard researchers Kevin Lewis, Marco Gonzalez and Jason Kaufman published a paper called Social selection and peer...
  13. underpaidgenius posted this

← Previous Post Next Post →

About

Web anthropologist, futurist, author. My focus is the future, and the tectonic forces pushing business, media, and society into an unclear and accelerating future. (More.)

Working on longer format projects, Sign up for the newsletter.

GigaOM Research analyst and curator.



Also writing beaconstreets.com.

Contact me. or ask me a question.



My Vizify profile.

Socialogy

  • Brian Solis | Brian and I debunk big data, and Brian makes the case for empathy.

  • Deb Lavoy | Deb is dubious about management's inclinations, and says, 'Just because you are networked doesn’t mean it necessarily helps you understand, or realize your needs more effectively.'

  • John Hagel | John offers up some great insights, like the fact that passion is lower the larger that businesses get.

  • Euan Semple | A chat with my old pal, and the author of Organizations Don't Tweet, People Do

  • Will McInnes | The author of Culture Shock and managing director of Nixon/McInnes

  • Jennifer Magnolfi | An interview with the woman who said, 'Work is not a place you go, it's a thing you do'.

    • Hot Now

  • What Drives Us? | A draft chapter of my book, discussing motivations, Maslow's hierarchy, and fluidarity.

  • Socialogy: Interview With John Hagel | I Speak with Joh Hagel about the innovation at the edge.

  • Complex organisation arises from webs of interaction among causal factors | So, it turns out that DNA is, in fact, a great metaphor for business culture, but only after you realize that DNA is not a few hundred off-on switches, but instead a universe of unknowable complexities, that we can interact with, and understand at some abstract cartoonish level, but not control, and never fully comprehend.

  • Bitcoin May Be the Global Economy’s Last Safe Haven | Paul Ford

  • Innovators Get Better With Age | Companies make a mistake by relying too much on the innoations of the young, because Nobel laureats don't come into their prime until their 50s.

    • Oldie

  • Infodemics | 2009 | Passing incomplete or inaccurate information about some risk event can make people take actions that increase the damage of the event itself.

    • Lynx theme created by Andrew Stichbury for Tumblr.