The effect of network structure on preference formation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

How does network structure influence opinion? Relying on theories of preference formation and social networks, we randomize a sample of adults into networks that vary in structure. In one (a clustered lattice), individuals' connections tend to be connected to each other; in another (a random network), individuals' connections tend not to be connected, instead providing access to different regions of the network. We seed messages that reflect competing sides of policy debates in each network: one underdog viewpoint is seeded less often, while a dominant viewpoint is seeded more often. We track their diffusion and find that the random network increases exposure to underdog views, compared with the clustered lattice. Individuals in the random network subsequently learn more about the policy debates and become more sympathetic toward the underdog perspective. This has implications for how less funded information campaigns can strategically target social networks to maximize exposure and change minds.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)717-721
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Politics
Volume79
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2017

Fingerprint

social network
campaign

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

The effect of network structure on preference formation. / Klar, Samara M; Shmargad, Yotam.

In: Journal of Politics, Vol. 79, No. 2, 01.04.2017, p. 717-721.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e8a9105ffc9f4f30ac211fbae4bf9484,
title = "The effect of network structure on preference formation",
abstract = "How does network structure influence opinion? Relying on theories of preference formation and social networks, we randomize a sample of adults into networks that vary in structure. In one (a clustered lattice), individuals' connections tend to be connected to each other; in another (a random network), individuals' connections tend not to be connected, instead providing access to different regions of the network. We seed messages that reflect competing sides of policy debates in each network: one underdog viewpoint is seeded less often, while a dominant viewpoint is seeded more often. We track their diffusion and find that the random network increases exposure to underdog views, compared with the clustered lattice. Individuals in the random network subsequently learn more about the policy debates and become more sympathetic toward the underdog perspective. This has implications for how less funded information campaigns can strategically target social networks to maximize exposure and change minds.",
author = "Klar, {Samara M} and Yotam Shmargad",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1086/689972",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
pages = "717--721",
journal = "Journal of Politics",
issn = "0022-3816",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of network structure on preference formation

AU - Klar, Samara M

AU - Shmargad, Yotam

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - How does network structure influence opinion? Relying on theories of preference formation and social networks, we randomize a sample of adults into networks that vary in structure. In one (a clustered lattice), individuals' connections tend to be connected to each other; in another (a random network), individuals' connections tend not to be connected, instead providing access to different regions of the network. We seed messages that reflect competing sides of policy debates in each network: one underdog viewpoint is seeded less often, while a dominant viewpoint is seeded more often. We track their diffusion and find that the random network increases exposure to underdog views, compared with the clustered lattice. Individuals in the random network subsequently learn more about the policy debates and become more sympathetic toward the underdog perspective. This has implications for how less funded information campaigns can strategically target social networks to maximize exposure and change minds.

AB - How does network structure influence opinion? Relying on theories of preference formation and social networks, we randomize a sample of adults into networks that vary in structure. In one (a clustered lattice), individuals' connections tend to be connected to each other; in another (a random network), individuals' connections tend not to be connected, instead providing access to different regions of the network. We seed messages that reflect competing sides of policy debates in each network: one underdog viewpoint is seeded less often, while a dominant viewpoint is seeded more often. We track their diffusion and find that the random network increases exposure to underdog views, compared with the clustered lattice. Individuals in the random network subsequently learn more about the policy debates and become more sympathetic toward the underdog perspective. This has implications for how less funded information campaigns can strategically target social networks to maximize exposure and change minds.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85017371239&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85017371239&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1086/689972

DO - 10.1086/689972

M3 - Article

VL - 79

SP - 717

EP - 721

JO - Journal of Politics

JF - Journal of Politics

SN - 0022-3816

IS - 2

ER -