Many online social networks thrive on automatic sharing of friends' activities to a user through activity feeds, which may influence the user's next actions. However, identifying such social influence is tricky because these activities are simultaneously impacted by influence and homophily. We propose a statistical procedure that uses commonly available network and observational data about people's actions to estimate the extent of copy-influence---mimicking others' actions that appear in a feed. We assume that non-friends don't influence users; thus, comparing how a user's activity correlates with friends versus non-friends who have similar preferences can help tease out the effect of copy-influence. Experiments on datasets from multiple social networks show that estimates that don't account for homophily overestimate copy-influence by varying, often large amounts. Further, copy-influence estimates fall below 1 of total actions in all networks: most people, and almost all actions, are not affected by the feed. Our results question common perceptions around the extent of copy-influence in online social networks and suggest improvements to diffusion and recommendation models.
presented an edge-reversal test, where if person A has an edge to B but not vice-versa, then comparing B's influence on A with that of A on B would give us a measure of influence due to the directed edge @cite_34 . This is based on the intuition that influence should flow only one way on directed edges; it also has the advantage of strongly addressing the effect of homophily. This test was used to examine whether becoming obese is contagious and found that influence is significantly higher in the direction of the directed edge than the opposite direction. In online contexts like Twitter with asymmetric information flows, this could fit well, but in networks with undirected edges, it is not so useful.
@cite_34
2149910108 2036443429 2156273451 2149084727
Node characteristics and behaviors are often correlated with the structure of social networks over time. While evidence of this type of assortative mixing and temporal clustering of behaviors among linked nodes is used to support claims of peer influence and social contagion in networks, homophily may also explain such evidence. Here we develop a dynamic matched sample estimation framework to distinguish influence and homophily effects in dynamic networks, and we apply this framework to a global instant messaging network of 27.4 million users, using data on the day-by-day adoption of a mobile service application and users' longitudinal behavioral, demographic, and geographic data. We find that previous methods overestimate peer influence in product adoption decisions in this network by 300–700 , and that homophily explains >50 of the perceived behavioral contagion. These findings and methods are essential to both our understanding of the mechanisms that drive contagions in networks and our knowledge of how to propagate or combat them in domains as diverse as epidemiology, marketing, development economics, and public health. Recently, there has been increasing interest in making causal inference when interference is possible. In the presence of interference, treatment may have several types of effects. In this article, we consider inference about such effects when the population consists of groups of individuals where interference is possible within groups but not between groups. A two-stage randomization design is assumed where in the first stage groups are randomized to different treatment allocation strategies and in the second stage individuals are randomized to treatment or control conditional on the strategy assigned to their group in the first stage. For this design, the asymptotic distributions of estimators of the causal effects are derived when either the number of individuals per group or the number of groups grows large. Under certain homogeneity assumptions, the asymptotic distributions provide justification for Wald-type confidence intervals (CIs) and tests. Empirical results demonstrate that the Wald CIs have good coverage in finite samples and are narrower than CIs based on either the Chebyshev or Hoeffding inequalities provided the number of groups is not too small. The methods are illustrated by two examples which consider the effects of cholera vaccination and an intervention to encourage voting. We study the problem of labeling the edges of a social network graph (e.g., acquaintance connections in Facebook) as either positive (i.e., trust, true friendship) or negative (i.e., distrust, possible frenemy) relations. Such signed relations provide much stronger signal in tying the behavior of online users than the unipolar Homophily effect, yet are largely unavailable as most social graphs only contain unsigned edges. We show the surprising fact that it is possible to infer signed social ties with good accuracy solely based on users' behavior of decision making (or using only a small fraction of supervision information) via unsupervised and semi-supervised algorithms. This work hereby makes it possible to turn an unsigned acquaintance network (e.g. Facebook, Myspace) into a signed trust-distrust network (e.g. Epinion, Slashdot). Our results are based on a mixed effects framework that simultaneously captures users' behavior, social interactions as well as the interplay between the two. The framework includes a series of latent factor models and it also encodes the principles of balance and status from Social psychology. Experiments on Epinion and Yahoo! Pulse networks illustrate that (1) signed social ties can be predicted with high-accuracy even in fully unsupervised settings, and (2) the predicted signed ties are significantly more useful for social behavior prediction than simple Homophily. The authors consider processes on social networks that can potentially involve three factors: homophily, or the formation of social ties due to matching individual traits; social contagion, also known as social influence; and the causal effect of an individual’s covariates on his or her behavior or other measurable responses. The authors show that generically, all of these are confounded with each other. Distinguishing them from one another requires strong assumptions on the parametrization of the social process or on the adequacy of the covariates used (or both). In particular the authors demonstrate, with simple examples, that asymmetries in regression coefficients cannot identify causal effects and that very simple models of imitation (a form of social contagion) can produce substantial correlations between an individual’s enduring traits and his or her choices, even when there is no intrinsic affinity between them. The authors also suggest some possible constructive responses to these results.