Skip to main content

Engineering social contagions: Optimal network seeding in the presence of homophily


We use data on a real, large-scale social network of 27 million individuals interacting daily, together with the day-by-day adoption of a new mobile service product, to inform, build, and analyze data-driven simulations of the effectiveness of seeding (network targeting) strategies under different social conditions. Three main results emerge from our simulations. First, failure to consider homophily creates significant overestimation of the effectiveness of seeding strategies, casting doubt on conclusions drawn by simulation studies that do not model homophily. Second, seeding is constrained by the small fraction of potential influencers that exist in the network. We find that seeding more than 0.2% of the population is wasteful because the gain from their adoption is lower than the gain from their natural adoption (without seeding). Third, seeding is more effective in the presence of greater social influence. Stronger peer influence creates a greater than additive effect when combined with seeding. Our findings call into question some conventional wisdom about these strategies and suggest that their overall effectiveness may be overestimated.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Engineering social contagions: Optimal network seeding in the presence of homophily
      Available formats
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Engineering social contagions: Optimal network seeding in the presence of homophily
      Available formats
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Engineering social contagions: Optimal network seeding in the presence of homophily
      Available formats
Hide All
Abrahamson E., & Rosenkopf L. (1997). Social network effects on the extent of innovation diffusion: A computer simulation. Organization Science, 8 (3), 289309.
Aral S. (2011). Identifying social influence: A comment on opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science, 30 (2), 217223.
Aral S., Muchnik L., & Sundararajan A. (2009). Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106 (51), 2154421549. doi:10.1073/pnas.0908800106
Aral S., & Taylor S. (2011). Viral incentive systems: A randomized field experiment. Workshop on Information Systems Economics (WISE), December 7–9, Shanghai, China.
Aral S. & Van Alstyne M. (2011). The diversity-bandwidth tradeoff. American Journal of Sociology, 117 (1), 90171.
Aral S., & Walker D. (2011). Creating social contagion through viral product design: A randomized trial of peer influence in networks. Management Science, 57 (9), 16231639.
Aral S., & Walker D. (2012). Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks. Science, 337 (6092), 337341. doi:10.1126/science.1215842
Bakshy E., Eckles D., Yan R., & Rosenn I. (2012a). Social influence in social advertising: Evidence from field experiments. Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), June 8–12, Valencia, Spain.
Bakshy E., Rosenn I., Marlow C., & Adamic L. (2012b). The role of social networks in information diffusion. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), April 16–20, Lyon, France.
Barabási L. (2002). Linked: How Everything is Connected to Everything Else and What it Means for Business, Science and Everyday Life. New York: Penguin Group.
Barthélemy M., Barrat A., Pastor-Satorras R., & Vespignani A. (2004). Velocity and hierarchical spread of epidemic outbreaks in scale-free networks. Physical Review Letters, 92 (17), 178701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.178701
Bass F. M. (1969). A new product growth for model consumer durables. Management Science, 15 (5), 215227. doi:10.1287/mnsc.15.5.215
Becker M. H. (1970). Factors affecting diffusion of innovations among health professionals. American Journal of Public Health, 60 (2), 294304.
Biyalogorsky E., Gerstner E., & Libai B. (2008). Customer referral management: Optimal reward programs. Marketing Science, 20 (1), 8295.
Borgatti S. P. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Networks, 27 (1), 5571. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2004.11.008
Buttle F. A. (1998). Word of mouth: Understanding and managing referral marketing. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6 (3), 241254.
Centola D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science, 329 (5996), 11941197.
Centola D. (2011). An experimental study of homophily in the adoption of health behavior. Science, 334 (6060), 12691272.
Centola D., & Macy M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American Journal of Sociology, 113 (3), 702734.
Chatfield C., & Goodhardt G. J. (1973). A consumer purchasing model with erlang inter-purchase times. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 68, 828835.
Christakis N. A., & Fowler J. H. (2007). The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. The New England Journal of Medicine, 357 (4), 370379.
Cohen R., Erez K., ben-Avraham, D., & Havlin S. (2001). Breakdown of the Internet under intentional attack. Physical Review Letters, 86, 3683685
Dezső Z., & Barabási A.-L. (2002). Halting viruses in scale-free networks. Physical Review E, 65 (5), 055103. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.055103
Domingos P., & Richardson M. (2001). Mining the network value of customers. Paper presented at the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, California.
Dover Y., Goldenberg J., & Shapira D. (2012). Network Traces on Penetration: Uncovering Degree Distribution from Adoption Data. Marketing Science, 31 (4), 689712.
Eagle N., Macy M., & Claxton R. (2010). Network diversity and economic development. Science, 328 (5981), 10291031.
Freeman L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social networks, 1, 215239.
Galeotti A., & Goyal S. (2009). Influencing the influencers: A theory of strategic diffusion. The RAND Journal of Economics, 40 (3), 509532. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2009.00075.x
Gladwell M. (2000). Tipping points: How little things can make a big difference. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Godes D., & Mayzlin D. (2009). Firm-created word-of-mouth communication: Evidence from a field test. Marketing Science, 28 (4), 721739.
Goldenberg J., Han S., Lehmann D. R., & Hong J. W. (2009). The role of hubs in the adoption process. Journal of Marketing, 73 (2), 113.
Goldenberg J., Libai B., & Muller E. (2001). Talk of the network: A complex systems look at the underlying process of word-of-mouth. Marketing Letters, 12 (3), 211223.
Goyal A, Bonchi F, & Lakshmanan L. V. S. (2010). Learning influence probabilities in social networks. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Conference on Web search and Data Mining (WSDM), February 4–6, New York, USA.
Iyengar R., Van den Bulte C., & Valente T. W. (2011). Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science, 30 (195).
Katz E., & Lazarsfeld P. (1955). Personal influence. New York: Free Press.
Kempe D., Kleinberg J. & Tardos É. (2003). Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. Paper presented at the Ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, Washington, DC.
Kitsak M., Gallos L. K., Havlin S., Liljeros F., Muchnik L., Stanley H. E., & Makse H. A. (2010). Identification of influential spreaders in complex networks. Nature Physics, 6 (11), 888893. doi:10.1038/nphys1746
Krebs V. E. (2002). Uncloaking terrorist networks. First Monday, 7 (4). Retrieved from
Lazarsfeld P. F., Berelson B., & Gaudet H. (1948). The people's choice. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lazer D., Pentland A., Adamic L., Aral S., Barabási A.-L., Brewer D.,. . . Alstyne M. V. (2009). Computational social science. Science, 323 (5915), 721723. doi:10.1126/science.1167742
Leider S., Mobius M. M., Rosenblat T., & Do Q.A. (2009). Directed altruism and enforced reciprocity in social networks. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124 (4), 18151851.
Leskovec J., Adamic L. A., & Huberman B. A. (2007). The dynamics of viral marketing. ACM Transactions on the Web, 1 (1).
Libai B., Biyalogorsky E., & Gerstner E. (2003). Setting referral fees in affiliate marketing. Journal of Service Research, 5 (4), 303315. doi:10.1177/1094670503005004003
Libai B., Muller E., & Peres R. (2009). The Social Value of Word-of-Mouth Programs: Acceleration versus Acquisition. Working Paper No. 22/2009, Recanati Business School, Tel Aviv University.
Liben-Nowell D., & Kleinberg J. (2008). Tracing information flow on a global scale using internet chain-letter data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105 (12), 46334638.
Marsden P. (2006). Seed to spread: How seeding trials ignite epidemics of demand. In Kirby J., & Marsden P. (Eds.), Connected marketing: The viral, buzz, and word of mouth revolution (pp. 323). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
McPherson M., Smith-Lovin L., & Cook J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
Newman M. E. J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45, 167256.
Noel E., & Nyhan B. (2011). The “unfriending” problem: The consequences of homophily in friendship retention for causal estimates of social influence. Social Networks, 33 (3), 211218.
Pastor-Satorras R., & Vespignani A. (2001). A. Epidemic spreading in scale-free networks. Physical Review Letters, 86, 3203203.
Reingen P. H., & Kernan J. B. (1986). Analysis of referral networks in marketing: Methods and illustration. Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (4), 370378.
Rosen E. (2009). The anatomy of buzz revisited: Real-life lessons in word of mouth marketing. New York: Random House Digital, Inc.
Rosvall M., & Bergstrom C. T. (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105 (4), 11181123. doi:10.1073/pnas.0706851105
Schmitt P., Skiera B. & Van den Bulte C. (2011). Referral programs and customer value. Journal of Marketing, 75 (1), 4659. doi:10.1509/jmkg.75.1.46
Shalizi C. R., & Thomas A. C. (2011). Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies. Sociological Methods Research, 42 (2), 211239.
Singh J. (1990). Voice, exit, and negative word-of-mouth behaviors: An investigation across three service categories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18 (1), 115. doi:10.1177/009207039001800101
Sun E., Rosenn I., Marlow C., & Lento T. (2009). Gesundheit! modeling contagion through Facebook news feed. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, San Jose, CA.
Sundararajan A. (2008). Network seeding. Mimeo: New York University.
Taylor S., Bakshy E., & Aral S. (2013). Selection Effects in Online Sharing: Consequences for Peer Adoption, 14th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), June 16–20, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Uncles M., Ehrenberg A., & Hammond K. (1995). Patterns of buyer behavior: Regularities, models, and extensions. Marketing Science, 14 (3), G7178. doi:10.1287/mksc.14.3.G71
Valente T. W. (2012). Network interventions. Science, 337 (6090), 4953. doi:10.1126/science.1217330
Valente T. W., & Davis R. L. (1999). Accelerating the diffusion of innovations using opinion leaders. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 556 (1), 5567. doi:10.1177/000271629956600105
Van den Bulte C., & Joshi Y. V. (2007). New product diffusion with influentials and imitators. Marketing Science, 26 (3), 400421. doi:10.1287/mksc.1060.0224
Watts D. J., & Dodds P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 441458.
Whyte W. H. (1954). The web of word of mouth. Fortune, 5, 140212.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Network Science
  • ISSN: 2050-1242
  • EISSN: 2050-1250
  • URL: /core/journals/network-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Type Description Title
Supplementary Materials

Aral Supplementary Material

 Word (598 KB)
598 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 350 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1409 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.