Interdependence and the cost of uncoordinated responses to COVID-19.

Social distancing is the core policy response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). But, as federal, state and local governments begin opening businesses and relaxing shelter-in-place orders worldwide, we lack quantitative evidence on how policies in one region affect mobility and social distancing in other regions and the consequences of uncoordinated regional policies adopted in the presence of such spillovers. To investigate this concern, we combined daily, county-level data on shelter-in-place policies with movement data from over 27 million mobile devices, social network connections among over 220 million Facebook users, daily temperature and precipitation data from 62,000 weather stations, and county-level census data on population demographics to estimate the geographic and social network spillovers created by regional policies across the United States. Our analysis shows that the contact patterns of people in a given region are significantly influenced by the policies and behaviors of people in other, sometimes distant, regions. When just one-third of a state's social and geographic peer states adopt shelter-in-place policies, it creates a reduction in mobility equal to the state's own policy decisions. These spillovers are mediated by peer travel and distancing behaviors in those states. A simple analytical model calibrated with our empirical estimates demonstrated that the "loss from anarchy" in uncoordinated state policies is increasing in the number of noncooperating states and the size of social and geographic spillovers. These results suggest a substantial cost of uncoordinated government responses to COVID-19 when people, ideas, and media move across borders.

Identity effects in social media.

Identity cues appear ubiquitously alongside content in social media today. Some also suggest universal identification, with names and other cues, as a useful deterrent to harmful behaviours online. Unfortunately, we know little about the effects of identity cues on opinions and online behaviours. Here we used a large-scale longitudinal field experiment to estimate the extent to which identity cues affect how people form opinions about and interact with content online. We randomly assigned content produced on a social news aggregation website to 'identified' and 'anonymous' conditions to estimate the causal effect of identity cues on how viewers vote and reply to content. The effects of identity cues were significant and heterogeneous, accounting for between 28% and 61% of the variation in voting associated with commenters' production, reputation and reciprocity. Our results also showed that identity cues cause people to vote on content faster (consistent with heuristic processing) and to vote according to content producers' reputations, production history and reciprocal votes with content viewers. These results provide evidence that rich-get-richer dynamics and inequality in social content evaluation are mediated by identity cues. They also provide insights into the evolution of status in online communities. From a practical perspective, we show via simulation that social platforms may improve content quality by including votes on anonymized content as a ranking signal.

Providing normative information increases intentions to accept a COVID-19 vaccine.

Despite the availability of multiple safe vaccines, vaccine hesitancy may present a challenge to successful control of the COVID-19 pandemic. As with many human behaviors, people's vaccine acceptance may be affected by their beliefs about whether others will accept a vaccine (i.e., descriptive norms). However, information about these descriptive norms may have different effects depending on the actual descriptive norm, people's baseline beliefs, and the relative importance of conformity, social learning, and free-riding. Here, using a pre-registered, randomized experiment (N = 484,239) embedded in an international survey (23 countries), we show that accurate information about descriptive norms can increase intentions to accept a vaccine for COVID-19. We find mixed evidence that information on descriptive norms impacts mask wearing intentions and no statistically significant evidence that it impacts intentions to physically distance. The effects on vaccination intentions are largely consistent across the 23 included countries, but are concentrated among people who were otherwise uncertain about accepting a vaccine. Providing normative information in vaccine communications partially corrects individuals' underestimation of how many other people will accept a vaccine. These results suggest that presenting people with information about the widespread and growing acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines helps to increase vaccination intentions.

Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks.

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.

A causal test of the strength of weak ties.

The authors analyzed data from multiple large-scale randomized experiments on LinkedIn's People You May Know algorithm, which recommends new connections to LinkedIn members, to test the extent to which weak ties increased job mobility in the world's largest professional social network. The experiments randomly varied the prevalence of weak ties in the networks of over 20 million people over a 5-year period, during which 2 billion new ties and 600,000 new jobs were created. The results provided experimental causal evidence supporting the strength of weak ties and suggested three revisions to the theory. First, the strength of weak ties was nonlinear. Statistical analysis found an inverted U-shaped relationship between tie strength and job transmission such that weaker ties increased job transmission but only to a point, after which there were diminishing marginal returns to tie weakness. Second, weak ties measured by interaction intensity and the number of mutual connections displayed varying effects. Moderately weak ties (measured by mutual connections) and the weakest ties (measured by interaction intensity) created the most job mobility. Third, the strength of weak ties varied by industry. Whereas weak ties increased job mobility in more digital industries, strong ties increased job mobility in less digital industries.

Global survey on COVID-19 beliefs, behaviours and norms.

Policy and communication responses to COVID-19 can benefit from better understanding of people's baseline and resulting beliefs, behaviours and norms. From July 2020 to March 2021, we fielded a global survey on these topics in 67 countries yielding over 2 million responses. This paper provides an overview of the motivation behind the survey design, details the sampling and weighting designed to make the results representative of populations of interest and presents some insights learned from the survey. Several studies have already used the survey data to analyse risk perception, attitudes towards mask wearing and other preventive behaviours, as well as trust in information sources across communities worldwide. This resource can open new areas of enquiry in public health, communication and economic policy by leveraging large-scale, rich survey datasets on beliefs, behaviours and norms during a global pandemic.

Interdependent program evaluation: Geographic and social spillovers in COVID-19 closures and reopenings in the United States.

In an interconnected world, understanding policy spillovers is essential. We propose a program evaluation framework to measure policy spillover effects and apply that framework to study the governmental responses to COVID-19 in the United States. Our analysis suggests the presence of social spillovers. We estimate that while state closures directly reduced mobility by 3 to 4%, all other states locking down further decreased mobility in the focal state by 8 to 14%. Similarly, while reopening directly increased mobility by 2 to 3%, all other states' reopening increased mobility in the focal state by 12 to 21%. Our analysis also suggests geographic spillovers: Travel from locked down origins to open destinations increased by 12 to 29%. In contrast, travel from reopened origins to locked down destinations decreased by 6 to 7% for nearby counties and by 14 to 18% for distant counties. Despite its limitations, we believe that our approach takes the first steps toward creating a framework for interdependent program evaluation across policy domains.

Publisher Correction: Social influence maximization under empirical influence models.

In the version of this Letter originally published, in the key for Fig. 1 the red square was mistakenly labelled 'Low influence' and 'High susceptibility' but should have been labelled 'High influence' and 'Low susceptibility'. This has now been corrected.

The spread of true and false news online.

We investigated the differential diffusion of all of the verified true and false news stories distributed on Twitter from 2006 to 2017. The data comprise ~126,000 stories tweeted by ~3 million people more than 4.5 million times. We classified news as true or false using information from six independent fact-checking organizations that exhibited 95 to 98% agreement on the classifications. Falsehood diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects were more pronounced for false political news than for false news about terrorism, natural disasters, science, urban legends, or financial information. We found that false news was more novel than true news, which suggests that people were more likely to share novel information. Whereas false stories inspired fear, disgust, and surprise in replies, true stories inspired anticipation, sadness, joy, and trust. Contrary to conventional wisdom, robots accelerated the spread of true and false news at the same rate, implying that false news spreads more than the truth because humans, not robots, are more likely to spread it.

Social influence maximization under empirical influence models.

Social influence maximization models aim to identify the smallest number of influential individuals (seed nodes) that can maximize the diffusion of information or behaviours through a social network. However, while empirical experimental evidence has shown that network assortativity and the joint distribution of influence and susceptibility are important mechanisms shaping social influence, most current influence maximization models do not incorporate these features. Here, we specify a class of empirically motivated influence models and study their implications for influence maximization in six synthetic and six real social networks of varying sizes and structures. We find that ignoring assortativity and the joint distribution of influence and susceptibility leads traditional models to underestimate influence propagation by 21.7% on average, for a fixed seed set size. The traditional models and the empirical types that we specify here also identify substantially different seed sets, with only 19.8% overlap between them. The optimal seeds chosen under empirical influence models are relatively less well-connected and less central nodes, and they have more cohesive, embedded ties with their contacts. Hence, empirically motivated influence models have the potential to identify more realistic sets of key influencers in a social network and inform intervention designs that disseminate information or change attitudes and behaviours.

Exercise contagion in a global social network.

We leveraged exogenous variation in weather patterns across geographies to identify social contagion in exercise behaviours across a global social network. We estimated these contagion effects by combining daily global weather data, which creates exogenous variation in running among friends, with data on the network ties and daily exercise patterns of ∼1.1M individuals who ran over 350M km in a global social network over 5 years. Here we show that exercise is socially contagious and that its contagiousness varies with the relative activity of and gender relationships between friends. Less active runners influence more active runners, but not the reverse. Both men and women influence men, while only women influence other women. While the Embeddedness and Structural Diversity theories of social contagion explain the influence effects we observe, the Complex Contagion theory does not. These results suggest interventions that account for social contagion will spread behaviour change more effectively.

Social influence bias: a randomized experiment.

Our society is increasingly relying on the digitized, aggregated opinions of others to make decisions. We therefore designed and analyzed a large-scale randomized experiment on a social news aggregation Web site to investigate whether knowledge of such aggregates distorts decision-making. Prior ratings created significant bias in individual rating behavior, and positive and negative social influences created asymmetric herding effects. Whereas negative social influence inspired users to correct manipulated ratings, positive social influence increased the likelihood of positive ratings by 32% and created accumulating positive herding that increased final ratings by 25% on average. This positive herding was topic-dependent and affected by whether individuals were viewing the opinions of friends or enemies. A mixture of changing opinion and greater turnout under both manipulations together with a natural tendency to up-vote on the site combined to create the herding effects. Such findings will help interpret collective judgment accurately and avoid social influence bias in collective intelligence in the future.

Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks.

Identifying social influence in networks is critical to understanding how behaviors spread. We present a method that uses in vivo randomized experimentation to identify influence and susceptibility in networks while avoiding the biases inherent in traditional estimates of social contagion. Estimation in a representative sample of 1.3 million Facebook users showed that younger users are more susceptible to influence than older users, men are more influential than women, women influence men more than they influence other women, and married individuals are the least susceptible to influence in the decision to adopt the product offered. Analysis of influence and susceptibility together with network structure revealed that influential individuals are less susceptible to influence than noninfluential individuals and that they cluster in the network while susceptible individuals do not, which suggests that influential people with influential friends may be instrumental in the spread of this product in the network.