Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives

By I. Fowler. 2009

371 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

THE SPREAD OF ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR IN A LARGE SOCIAL NETWORK (2010, unknown): “These general findings correspond with previous literature on obesity, smoking, happiness, and depression (10,11,12,13,14), though there are specific patterns of spread that appear to be particular to alcohol use.”
Capital is not enough: opportunity entrepreneurship and formal institutions (2018, unknown): “…social networking theory, which suggests that various phenomenon such as entrepreneurship can spread through social networks in a rather automatic way via mechanisms such as emotional contagion, informational cascades, or the bandwagon effect (Christakis and Fowler 2009; Nikolaev and Wood 2017).”
Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks (2011, background): “…one person can be influenced by other person who is not more than three steps away) were applied to categorize citation strength (Christakis & Fowler, 2009): direct citation (e.g., author A directly cited author B), indirect citation (e.g., there are three or less nodes in the shortest path…”
Effects of Positive Practices on Organizational Effectiveness (2011, unknown): “(p. 173) This effect is also well documented in the social networks literature (Christakis & Fowler, 2009).”
Political Fact-Checking on Twitter: When Do Corrections Have an Effect? (2018, background): “Since friends are statistically likely (although not guaranteed) to be members of the same social group as the individual (Christakis & Fowler, 2009), a correction from a friend is likely to imply that the group does not accept this rumor and/or does not see strategic value in promoting it.”
Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World (2012, background): “…1977), the contagious spread of ideas in a social network context has gained increasing interest across different fields, including the spread of obesity (Christakis and Fowler 2009), viral marketing (Godes et al. 2005, Ho and Dempsey 2010), and diffusion of digital content (Susarla et al. 2011).”
Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts (2010, background): “…genetic differences in explaining political opinions and behavior is an area of ongoing work (e.g., Alford, Funk, and Hibbing 2005; Dawes and Fowler 2009; Eaves and Hatemi 2008; Fowler, Baker, and Dawes 2008; Fowler and Dawes 2008; Hatemi et al. 2009; Hatemi et al. 2007; Martin et al. 1986;…”
Make it personal: A social explanation system applied to group recommendations (2017, background): “There are some individual explanation approaches (Christakis and Fowler, 2009; Guy et al., 2009), that provide the names of particular friends who liked the proposed item to induce a better acceptance of that specific item; especially if the chosen names refer to good friends, tapping into the idea…”
Customer-to-Customer Interactions: Broadening the Scope of Word of Mouth Research (2010, background): “Looking at other disciplines, we have more evidence that quitting certain behaviors, such as smoking, is a social phenomenon in which people are affected by their social network (Christakis and Fowler 2009).”
Leaving the Nest and the Social Act of Voting: Turnout among First-Time Voters (2012, unknown): “In recent years, the empirical investigation of the influence of social networks has gained renewed attention (Christakis & Fowler, 2009; Klofstad, 2011; Nickerson, 2008; Stoker & Jennings, 1995).”