The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
New Product Diffusion with Influentials and Imitators
Abstract
We model the diffusion of innovations in markets with two segments: influentials who are more in touch with new developments and who affect another segment of imitators whose own adoptions do not affect the influentials. This two-segment structure with asymmetric influence is consistent with several theories in sociology and diffusion research, as well as many “viral” or “network” marketing strategies. We have four main results. (1) Diffusion in a mixture of influentials and imitators can exhibit a dip or “chasm” between the early and later parts of the diffusion curve. (2) The proportion of adoptions stemming from influentials need not decrease monotonically, but may first decrease and then increase. (3) Erroneously specifying a mixed-influence model to a mixture process where influentials act independently from each other can generate systematic changes in the parameter values reported in earlier research. (4) Empirical analysis of 33 different data series indicates that the two-segment model fits better than the standard mixed-influence, the Gamma/Shifted Gompertz, and the Weibull-Gamma models, especially in cases where a two-segment structure is likely to exist. Also, the two-segment model fits about as well as the Karmeshu-Goswami mixed-influence model, in which the coefficients of innovation and imitation vary across potential adopters in a continuous fashion.
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
Innovativeness: The Concept and Its Measurement
Midgley, D. F., & Dowling, G. R. (1978) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/208701 · Cited by 1,550
Counting Your Customers: Who-Are They and What Will They Do Next?
Schmittlein, D. C., Morrison, D. G., & Colombo, R. (1987) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.33.1.1 · Cited by 679
“Counting Your Customers” the Easy Way: An Alternative to the Pareto/NBD Model
Fader, P. S., Hardie, B. G. S., & Lee, K. L. (2005) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1040.0098 · Cited by 480
Valente, T. W., Hoffman, B. R., Ritt-Olson, A., Lichtman, K., & Johnson, C. A. (2003) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.93.11.1837 · Cited by 301
Cited by
Peer effects in the diffusion of solar photovoltaic panels
Bollinger, B., & Gillingham, K. (2012) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1120.0727 · Cited by 1,013
Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion
Iyengar, R., Van den Bulte, C., & Valente, T. W. (2011) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1100.0566 · Cited by 996
Firm-Created Word-of-Mouth Communication: Evidence from a Field Test
Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2009) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1080.0444 · Cited by 837
Spillover Effects in Seeded Word-of-Mouth Marketing Campaigns
Chae, I., Stephen, A. T., Bart, Y., & Yao, D. (2017) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.2016.1001 · Cited by 135
Freemium Pricing: Evidence from a Large-scale Field Experiment
Runge, J., Wagner, S., & Claussen, J. (2016) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2888471 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Van den Bulte, C., & Joshi, Y. V.
- Venue
- Marketing Science
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 400-421
- ISSN
- 0732-2399 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-548X
- OpenAlex
- W2106805078
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 29.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: New Product Diffusion with Influentials and Imitators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mksc.1060.0224
- The paper
- Van den Bulte, C., & Joshi, Y. V. (2007). New Product Diffusion with Influentials and Imitators. Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0224
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.