-
Understanding (Ir)rational Herding Online
Authors:
Henry K. Dambanemuya,
Johannes Wachs,
Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
Abstract:
Investigations of social influence in collective decision-making have become possible due to recent technologies and platforms that record interactions in far larger groups than could be studied before. Herding and its impact on decision-making are critical areas of practical interest and research study. However, despite theoretical work suggesting that it matters whether individuals choose who to…
▽ More
Investigations of social influence in collective decision-making have become possible due to recent technologies and platforms that record interactions in far larger groups than could be studied before. Herding and its impact on decision-making are critical areas of practical interest and research study. However, despite theoretical work suggesting that it matters whether individuals choose who to imitate based on cues such as experience or whether they herd at random, there is little empirical analysis of this distinction. To demonstrate the distinction between what the literature calls "rational" and "irrational" herding, we use data on tens of thousands of loans from a well-established online peer-to-peer (p2p) lending platform. First, we employ an empirical measure of memory in complex systems to measure herding in lending. Then, we illustrate a network-based approach to visualize herding. Finally, we model the impact of herding on collective outcomes. Our study reveals that loan performance is not solely determined by whether the lenders engage in herding or not. Instead, the interplay between herding and the imitated lenders' prior success on the platform predicts loan outcomes. In short, herds led by expert lenders tend to pick loans that do not default. We discuss the implications of this under-explored aspect of herding for platform designers, borrowers, and lenders. Our study advances collective intelligence theories based on a case of high-stakes group decision-making online.
△ Less
Submitted 22 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
Emergent Influence Networks in Good-Faith Online Discussions
Authors:
Henry K. Dambanemuya,
Daniel Romero,
Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
Abstract:
Town hall-type debates are increasingly moving online, irrevocably transforming public discourse. Yet, we know relatively little about crucial social dynamics that determine which arguments are more likely to be successful. This study investigates the impact of one's position in the discussion network created via responses to others' arguments on one's persuasiveness in unfacilitated online debate…
▽ More
Town hall-type debates are increasingly moving online, irrevocably transforming public discourse. Yet, we know relatively little about crucial social dynamics that determine which arguments are more likely to be successful. This study investigates the impact of one's position in the discussion network created via responses to others' arguments on one's persuasiveness in unfacilitated online debates. We propose a novel framework for measuring the impact of network position on persuasiveness, using a combination of social network analysis and machine learning. Complementing existing studies investigating the effect of linguistic aspects on persuasiveness, we show that the user's position in a discussion network influences their persuasiveness online. Moreover, the recognition of successful persuasion further increases this dominant network position. Our findings offer important insights into the complex social dynamics of online discourse and provide practical insights for organizations and individuals seeking to understand the interplay between influential positions in a discussion network and persuasive strategies in digital spaces.
△ Less
Submitted 22 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
Beyond Words: An Experimental Study of Signaling in Crowdfunding
Authors:
Henry K. Dambanemuya,
Eunseo Choi,
Darren Gergle,
Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
Abstract:
Increasingly, crowdfunding is transforming financing for many people worldwide. Yet we know relatively little about how, why, and when funding outcomes are impacted by signaling between funders. We conduct two studies of N=500 and N=750 participants involved in crowdfunding to investigate the effect of certain characteristics of ``crowd signals'' on the decision to fund. We find that, under a vari…
▽ More
Increasingly, crowdfunding is transforming financing for many people worldwide. Yet we know relatively little about how, why, and when funding outcomes are impacted by signaling between funders. We conduct two studies of N=500 and N=750 participants involved in crowdfunding to investigate the effect of certain characteristics of ``crowd signals'' on the decision to fund. We find that, under a variety of conditions, contributions of heterogeneous amounts arriving at varying time intervals are significantly more likely to be selected than homogeneous contribution amounts and times. The impact of signaling is strongest among participants who are susceptible to social influence. The effect is remarkably general across different project types, fundraising goals, participant interest in the projects, and participants' altruistic attitudes. Critically, the role of crowd signals in decision-making is typically unrecognized by participants. Our results underscore the fundamental nature of social signaling in crowdfunding, informing strategies for platforms, funders, and project creators.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2024; v1 submitted 14 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Online Engagement with Retracted Articles: Who, When, and How?
Authors:
Henry K. Dambanemuya,
Rod Abhari,
Nicholas Vincent,
Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
Abstract:
Retracted research discussed on social media can spread misinformation. Yet we lack an understanding of how retracted articles are mentioned by academic and non-academic users. This is especially relevant on Twitter due to the platform's prominent role in science communication. Here, we analyze the pre- and post-retraction differences in Twitter attention and engagement metrics for over 3,800 retr…
▽ More
Retracted research discussed on social media can spread misinformation. Yet we lack an understanding of how retracted articles are mentioned by academic and non-academic users. This is especially relevant on Twitter due to the platform's prominent role in science communication. Here, we analyze the pre- and post-retraction differences in Twitter attention and engagement metrics for over 3,800 retracted English-language articles alongside comparable non-retracted articles. We subset these findings according to five user types detected by our supervised learning classifier: members of the public, academics, bots, science practitioners, and science communicators. We find that retracted articles receive greater user attention (tweet count) and engagement (likes, retweets, and replies) than non-retracted articles, especially among members of the public and bots, with the majority of user engagement happening before retraction. Our results highlight the prominent role of non-experts in discussions of retracted research and suggest an opportunity for social media platforms to contribute towards early detection of problematic scientific research online.
△ Less
Submitted 29 January, 2024; v1 submitted 8 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
-
A Multi-Platform Study of Crowd Signals Associated with Successful Online Fundraising
Authors:
Henry K. Dambanemuya,
Emőke-Ágnes Horvát
Abstract:
The growing popularity of online fundraising (aka "crowdfunding") has attracted significant research on the subject. In contrast to previous studies that attempt to predict the success of crowdfunded projects based on specific characteristics of the projects and their creators, we present a more general approach that focuses on crowd dynamics and is robust to the particularities of different crowd…
▽ More
The growing popularity of online fundraising (aka "crowdfunding") has attracted significant research on the subject. In contrast to previous studies that attempt to predict the success of crowdfunded projects based on specific characteristics of the projects and their creators, we present a more general approach that focuses on crowd dynamics and is robust to the particularities of different crowdfunding platforms. We rely on a multi-method analysis to investigate the correlates, predictive importance, and quasi-causal effects of features that describe crowd dynamics in determining the success of crowdfunded projects. By applying a multi-method analysis to a study of fundraising in three different online markets, we uncover general crowd dynamics that ultimately decide which projects will succeed. In all analyses and across the three different platforms, we consistently find that funders' behavioural signals (1) are significantly correlated with fundraising success; (2) approximate fundraising outcomes better than the characteristics of projects and their creators such as credit grade, company valuation, and subject domain; and (3) have significant quasi-causal effects on fundraising outcomes while controlling for potentially confounding project variables. By showing that universal features deduced from crowd behaviour are predictive of fundraising success on different crowdfunding platforms, our work provides design-relevant insights about novel types of collective decision-making online. This research inspires thus potential ways to leverage cues from the crowd and catalyses research into crowd-aware system design.
△ Less
Submitted 15 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
