Budget Allocation for Maximizing Viral Advertising in Social Networks

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 759-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo-Lei Zhang ◽  
Zhu-Zhong Qian ◽  
Wen-Zhong Li ◽  
Bin Tang ◽  
Sang-Lu Lu ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 205630511984751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Itai Himelboim ◽  
Guy J. Golan

The diffusion of social networking platforms ushered in a new age of peer-to-peer distributed online advertising content, widely referred to as viral advertising. The current study proposes a social networks approach to the study of viral advertising and identifying influencers. Expanding beyond the conventional retweets metrics to include Twitter mentions as connection in the network, this study identifies three groups of influencers, based on their connectivity in their networks: Hubs, or highly retweeted users, are Primary Influencers; Bridges, or highly mentioned users who associate connect users who would otherwise be disconnected, are Contextual Influencers, and Isolates are the Low Influence users. Each of these users’ roles in viral advertising is discussed and illustrated through the Heineken’s Worlds Apart campaign as a case study. Providing a unique examination of viral advertising from a network paradigm, our study advances scholarship on social media influencers and their contribution to content virality on digital platforms.


2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (16) ◽  
pp. 211-216
Author(s):  
Irinel-Constantin Morărescu ◽  
Vineeth Satheeskumar Varma ◽  
Lucian Buşoniu ◽  
Samson Lasaulce

Author(s):  
Mark E. Dickison ◽  
Matteo Magnani ◽  
Luca Rossi

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana-Maria Vranceanu ◽  
Linda C. Gallo ◽  
Laura M. Bogart

The present study investigated whether a social information processing bias contributes to the inverse association between trait hostility and perceived social support. A sample of 104 undergraduates (50 men) completed a measure of hostility and rated videotaped interactions in which a speaker disclosed a problem while a listener reacted ambiguously. Results showed that hostile persons rated listeners as less friendly and socially supportive across six conversations, although the nature of the hostility effect varied by sex, target rated, and manner in which support was assessed. Hostility and target interactively impacted ratings of support and affiliation only for men. At least in part, a social information processing bias could contribute to hostile persons' perceptions of their social networks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document