The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Structural diversity in social contagion
Open accessAbstract
The concept of contagion has steadily expanded from its original grounding in epidemic disease to describe a vast array of processes that spread across networks, notably social phenomena such as fads, political opinions, the adoption of new technologies, and financial decisions. Traditional models of social contagion have been based on physical analogies with biological contagion, in which the probability that an individual is affected by the contagion grows monotonically with the size of his or her “contact neighborhood”—the number of affected individuals with whom he or she is in contact. Whereas this contact neighborhood hypothesis has formed the underpinning of essentially all current models, it has been challenging to evaluate it due to the difficulty in obtaining detailed data on individual network neighborhoods during the course of a large-scale contagion process. Here we study this question by analyzing the growth of Facebook, a rare example of a social process with genuinely global adoption. We find that the probability of contagion is tightly controlled by the number of connected components in an individual's contact neighborhood, rather than by the actual size of the neighborhood. Surprisingly, once this “structural diversity” is controlled for, the size of the contact neighborhood is in fact generally a negative predictor of contagion. More broadly, our analysis shows how data at the size and resolution of the Facebook network make possible the identification of subtle structural signals that go undetected at smaller scales yet hold pivotal predictive roles for the outcomes of 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
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
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
Bollobás, B. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511814068 · Cited by 2,639
Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties
Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/521848 · Cited by 1,878
Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks
Aral, S., Muchnik, L., & Sundararajan, A. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0908800106 · Cited by 1,207
Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks
Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0913149107 · Cited by 767
“Gesundheit! Modeling Contagion through Facebook News Feed.”
Sun, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C., & Lento, T. (2009) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v3i1.13947 · Cited by 218
Self-citation
Cited by
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
DeepInf: Social Influence Prediction with Deep Learning
Qiu, J., Tang, J., Ma, H., Dong, Y., Wang, K., & Tang, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3219819.3220077 · Cited by 587
Virality Prediction and Community Structure in Social Networks
Weng, L., Menczer, F., & Ahn, Y.-Y. (2013) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep02522 · Cited by 512
Identifying Influential Nodes in Large-Scale Directed Networks: The Role of Clustering
Chen, D.-B., Gao, H., Lü, L., & Zhou, T. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077455 · Cited by 364
Exercise contagion in a global social network
Aral, S., & Nicolaides, C. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms14753 · Cited by 329
Metadata
- Authors
- Ugander, J., Backstrom, L., Marlow, C., & Kleinberg, J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2012-04-02
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 5962-5966
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2156020699
- Cited by
- 695
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 42.09
- 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: Structural diversity in social contagion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1116502109
- The paper
- Ugander, J., Backstrom, L., Marlow, C., & Kleinberg, J. (2012). Structural diversity in social contagion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116502109
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.