The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Social selection and peer influence in an online social network
Open accessAbstract
Disentangling the effects of selection and influence is one of social science's greatest unsolved puzzles: Do people befriend others who are similar to them, or do they become more similar to their friends over time? Recent advances in stochastic actor-based modeling, combined with self-reported data on a popular online social network site, allow us to address this question with a greater degree of precision than has heretofore been possible. Using data on the Facebook activity of a cohort of college students over 4 years, we find that students who share certain tastes in music and in movies, but not in books, are significantly likely to befriend one another. Meanwhile, we find little evidence for the diffusion of tastes among Facebook friends—except for tastes in classical/jazz music. These findings shed light on the mechanisms responsible for observed network homogeneity; provide a statistically rigorous assessment of the coevolution of cultural tastes and social relationships; and suggest important qualifications to our understanding of both homophily and contagion as generic social processes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,322
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste*
Bourdieu, P. (2018) · Food and Culture · doi:10.4324/9781315680347-10 · Cited by 20,289
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 · Cited by 18,567
Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.
Warner, M., Bourdieu, P., & Nice, R. (1985) · MLN · doi:10.2307/2905454 · Cited by 14,091
Valente, T. W. (2003) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.gim.0000061743.67794.c4 · Cited by 13,723
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984 · cited 1×
“Such claims are rarely substantiated by rigorous empirical research, however; and examples of “successful” diffusion may be more accessible to memory (29), whereas ubiquitous instances of “failed” diffusion are routinely ignored (30).”
BackgroundEllison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · Cited by 9,939
The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa066082 · Cited by 5,007
Cited by
The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks
Boccaletti, S., Bianconi, G., Criado, R., del Genio, C. I., Gómez-Gardeñes, J., Romance, M., Sendiña-Nadal, I., Wang, Z., & Zanin, M. (2014) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2014.07.001 · Cited by 3,125
Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2013) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5408 · Cited by 1,303
Science vs Conspiracy: Collective Narratives in the Age of Misinformation
Bessi, A., Coletto, M., Davidescu, G. A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118093 · Cited by 645
Measuring Emotional Contagion in Social Media
Ferrara, E., & Yang, Z. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0142390 · Cited by 532
The Hostile Audience: The Effect of Access to Broadband Internet on Partisan Affect
Lelkes, Y., Sood, G., & Iyengar, S. (2017) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12237 · Cited by 476
Metadata
- Authors
- Lewis, K., Gonzalez, M., & Kaufman, J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2011-12-19
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 68-72
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1969667322
- Cited by
- 542
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 24.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social selection and peer influence in an online social network. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1109739109
- The paper
- Lewis, K., Gonzalez, M., & Kaufman, J. (2012). Social selection and peer influence in an online social network. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1109739109
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
