Reis 2010 - Opinion Leadership, Market Maven, Influential

Ein Vergleich der Konzepte „Opinion Leadership“, „Market Maven“, „Social Hub“ und „Influential“ Seminararbeit eingereicht bei: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Oliver P. Heil von: Philipp J. Reis Matrikel-Nr. 26 24 33 9 [email protected] Studiengang Wirtschaftspädagogik 11. Semester Lessingstraße 13a 55118 Mainz Telefon: +49 1 76 / 26 08 25 29 Abgabetermin: 30. April 2010

Abstract Since the early studies of Katz (1957, pp. 63) influencing persons of an opinion is a

combination of persuasiveness, knowledge and social linkage. Since Lazarsfeld and his

colleagues (1948) developed the idea of the two step flow of communication several

definitions have arose. The three most frequently mentioned are opinion leaders, market

mavens and social hubs.

This paper firstly elaborates on the role of influence comparing two step flow and multi

step flow of communication showing that web 2.0 environments will more likely turn

receivers of the two step flow into stake holders of the multi step flow (Watts and

Dodds 2007, pp. 444). The different concepts of leadership, mavenism and the social

hubs will be characterised on the basis of empirical studies or computer simulated stud-

ies. Opinion leadership and market mavenism will be introduced firstly by the studies of

their initiators (Katz & Feick and Price) and will be reviewed by subsequent studies if

available. The study by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009) elaborating on social hubs

can itself be seen as a critical review of the study of Watts and Dodds (2007) being in-

troduced in context with interpersonal influence. This paper will further demonstrate

that both the social hub study as well as the contagion process in the multi step of com-

munication can be related to studies in logistics and medical science.

Keywords: Influential, Opinion Leader, Market Maven, Social Hub, Two Step Flow of Communi-cation, Multi Step Flow of Communication

1

Table of Contents

Table of Figures 2

Table of Charts 3

1. Introduction 4

2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials 5

3. The Different Concepts of Being Influential 8 3.1 Opinion Leaders –

Intermediates between the mass media and the public 8

3.2 Market Mavens – The First Ones to Know and the First Ones to Pass On 11

3.3 Social Hubs – Diffusion Through Central Points with Many Ties 14

4. Discussion 16

Bibliography

Appendix

2

Table of Figures

Figure 1.1: The Two Step Flow of Communication 6

Figure 1.2: The Multi Step Flow of Communication 7

3

Table of Charts

Chart 3.1: Scores of Leadership and Mavenism in the MMS 12

4

1. Introduction To successfully exert influence on somebody three questions need to be answered. The

first one deals with his or her strength to convince people and is also connected to the

charismatic character of a person. Secondly arguments of persuasion and thus the per-

son’s knowledge are being studied and finally his or her network of influence, meaning

how many others can be influenced (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 1). This has been and

is still topic of most studies since the 1940s voting study gave go-ahead for the two step

flow of communication, developed by Lazarsfeld, Katz and Berelson (1948), that will

be introduced in chapter 2 analysing influentials and the function of being influential to

somebody. This chapter also offers a critical view on the two step flow by reviewing the

study of Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 455) who suggested that the role of influentials

may be overrated.

Opinion leadership was the first concept that arose from personifying influence, but the

blurring definition of this early concept may have led to disjoin the original concept into

three sub concepts (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84). These sub concepts are currently

known as opinion leaders, market mavens and social hubs (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp.

1) and will be elaborated in chapter 3. Starting with opinion leaders (chapter 3.1), the

concept will be approached with the study of Katz who chose the 1940s voting study to

identify leaders and their followers along the timeline (Katz 1957, pp. 63). Further Katz

(1957, pp. 66) tried to identify opinion leaders on the basis of how often they have been

mentioned by their peers taking the Rovere study into account. Going deeper into mi-

cro-relationships of person-to-person relations and assessing the „[…] relative impor-

tance of personal influence […]“ he analysed the Decatur study (ibid.). The drug study

was added to his research analysing the relationships between opinion leaders (Katz

1957, pp. 75-76), thus reconstructing the flow of information throughout entire net-

works (ibid., pp. 69). Market mavenism (chapter 3.2) will be reviewed by comparing

the results of Feick and Price (1987) who designed the Market Maven Scale (MMS) and

Goodey and East who reviewed the MMS and did research on range of advice by com-

paring a self designed mavenism scale to the „[…]self-reported advice[…]“ (Goodey

and East 2008, pp. 265) of mavens. Gender- and motivation based mavenism has also

been tested by comparing the results between high and low mavenism score in the latter

case (ibid.) in order to find an overall set of mavenism characteristics (ibid., pp. 268).

1. Introduction

5 Finally the characteristics of social hubs (chapter 3.3) will be analysed. This will be

done by once again reviewing the drug study that gave several basic ideas for the con-

cept of the social hub. These basic ideas will be used to lead over to the most recent

study about social hubs by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009) that tested the role of hub

diffusion on the example of the Korean social network Cyworld by analysing computer

simulated models. This work can be seen as a reaction to the work of Watts and Dodds

(Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 7).

In Chapter 4 the characteristics of opinion leaders, market mavens and social hubs are

outlined to answer the question of this paper trying to relate leadership, mavenism and

hubs to the terms of charisma, knowledge and linkage. It also gives an answer if these

concepts have relations to the origins of their vocabulary in medical science and logis-

tics.

2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials The assumption of the existence of influentials that represent a small number of people

who influence a remarkable number of their peers (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441) is

based on the two step flow of communication that was developed by Lazarsfeld et.Al.

(1948, pp. 151). It suggests that information firstly flow from the mass media to so

called opinion leaders as shown in figure 1.1 (ibid.) which, including their sub concepts,

will be explained in the following chapter. These opinion leaders act as multipliers be-

tween the mass media and the public. The model does not rule out direct media-to-

audience contact, but suggests that the number of influenced people can be enhanced by

addressing opinion leaders that are shown as stars in figure 1.1 (Watts and Dodds 2007,

pp. 441; Katz 1957, pp. 61). For this purpose three preconditions, which have already

been mentioned in chapter 1, need to be fulfilled when being influential to others. These

are charisma, or other personality traits bearing convincing strength, knowledge and

linkage (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 1). Since the publication of the people’s choice in

1948 by Lazarsfeld and colleagues and supposedly for a long time to come the two step

flow is claimed the standard model to explain how information diffusion is propelled

(Roch 2005, pp. 110). Thus intensive research on the impact of this model on market

research and the implementation into the marketing process took place and several mo-

dels of influence were found (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441).

2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials

6

Figure 1.1: The Two Step Flow of Communication (Compiled by the Author, party adopted from Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441)

The two step flow has also been controversially discussed as there is, according to

Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444), still no generally accepted, empirical definition of an

influential. Two basic models are named to define influentials in terms of peers they

influence. Classical theories, like those by Coleman (1957), Merton (1968) and Burson-

Marsteller (2001) that are mentioned by Watts and Dodds, for example name fixed fig-

ures ranging from three to 14 influenced peers as a critical figure for influentialism.

Newer studies like those of Keller and Berry (2003, pp. 4) or Coulter et.Al. (2002) use

relative criteria ranging from 10% to 32% of the top opinion leaders as influential

(Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444). Watts and Dodds for example opt for the top-10% -

rule, which has lately been criticised by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009, pp. 3-4) who

opted for a fixed digit threshold. Their justification says that peer networks of opinion

leaders have different sizes, thus a leader in a larger network needs more follower peers

than in a small web with the result of different definitions of an influential (Goldenberg

et.Al. 2009, pp. 4). The models that emerge from both studies are also further distinct

and can be seen as the latest step of this ongoing discussion. Watts and Dodds (2007,

pp. 442) tend to continue the way of the Bass model (1969) saying that opinion leaders

and thus influentials are not obligatory for diffusion (Bass 2004, pp. 1835). Therefrom

they act on the assumption of a multi step flow of communication, that factors in

broadcasting in it’s lexically sense, thus the content transmitted by the mass media can

be received and recognised by every participant (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444). This

fact is symbolised by farther concentrical waves in figure 1.2 than in figure 1.1. Con-

trary to the two step flow of communication it also considers a feedback channel among


7 the participants and direct connections between peers like shown by the red arrows in

figure 1.2, which turns the receivers of the two step flow into stake holders of the multi

step flow (ibid.). The result shows a network that still has some hubs, that still handle

many person’s opinions besides the own, as the knots 1 und 3 in figure 1.2. But opinion

leaders or influentials can not be identified as such anymore as opinions can also be

carried from one sub network to the other, like via knot 2 in figure 1.2 (Watts and

Dodds 2007, pp. 443-444).

Figure 1.2: The Multi Step Flow of Communication (Compiled by the Author, party adopted from Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444)

Thus the research done by Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444) bases on the assumption of

cascades that have emerged from a stimulus and keep on infecting other easily influ-

enceable peers. In this kind of contagion model two types of cascades are conceivable.

Local cascades have a maximum range of „[…] one or two steps of the initiator.“

(Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 445), whereas the chance to infect the whole web remains

with only global cascades whose only limit is the size of the entire network (Watts and

Dodds 2007, pp. 445). To elaborate on their assumption of relevance or irrelevance of

influentials they compared cascades initiated by influentials with those of average per-

son’s origin (ibid.). Their results show that the role of influentials has been overrated as

average people have been equally successful in either initiating cascades or early adopt-

ing (ibid., pp. 453). According to Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 454) an influential is not

mandatory for the diffusion of information or innovation within and through networks.

Other facts like the size and property of the cascade window that defines the time slot

for successful cascades or the network density are much more important (ibid., pp. 445).

Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 453-454) do not deny the concept of persons, that are way


8 more influent than the average population of a network, but they point out that they are

not a necessary constraint for releasing a cascade.

Goldenberg et.Al. (2009, pp. 4) remain with the snow ball model assumption of hubs

that enhance the speed of adoption and the size of the network in a classical two step

flow of communication which will be deeper analysed in chapter 3.3 of this work. Their

results are contrary to Watts and Dodds, as they found out that hubs can enhance both

speed and size of a network and thus diffusion of information is getting faster and far-

ther carried (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 10).

3. The Different Concepts of Being Influential 3.1 Opinion Leaders –

Intermediates Between the Mass Media and the Public First findings about opinion leaders back-date to 1948, when Lazarsfeld and colleagues

did research on the presidential campaign of 1940 in the United States (Feick und Price

1987, pp. 83 qtd.a. Lazarsfeld et.Al. 1948). According to Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84)

Lazarsfeld et.Al. found out that opinion leaders can be seen as „[…] information bro-

kers intervening between mass media sources and the opinion and choices of the popu-

lation.“ (ibid.). This implies that opinion leaders are not lexically leaders, meant in the

sense of publicly known leaders or personalities, that usually have impact on the mass

media themselves (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 442 qtd.a. Grewal et. Al. 2000, pp. 230).

As already mentioned in the previous chapter they are the crucial part in the two step

flow of communication.

The two step flow does not rule out direct media-to-audience contact, yet the efficiency

of information diffusion via opinion leaders is higher (Katz 1957, pp. 61). This is being

justified by a higher credibility of interpersonal sources compared to nonpersonal ones

(Feick and Price 1987, pp. 83 qtd.a. Assael, Etgar and Henry 1983). Additionally opin-

ion leaders are exposed to the mass media earlier in the campaign and the likelihood of

changing the opinion in favour of the leader is higher than turning away from it (Katz

1957, pp. 72). Taking the Decature study into account, Katz (1957, pp. 71) also found

arguments that person-to-person communication is not only more effective, than mass

media-to-person communication in terms of higher frequency. It is also more effective

in terms of sustainability as it is rather unlikely that a peer, after being influenced by his

3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Opinion Leaders

9 leader changes his opinion once more (ibid., pp. 72). Furthermore a later direct contact

between the influenced peer and the mass media is more likely to be used as a re-

validation for his opinion (ibid., pp. 72).

Taking a deeper look on the properties of opinion leaders Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84)

elaborated mostly on the informational margin they have compared to their influencees.

One possibility to develop this information base is extensive interest in a subject of

choice, which is also the main motivation to advice peers (ibid.). This assumption is

also backed by Katz (1957, pp. 75), who mentions that leaders are steadily exposed to

several topic related mass media what he points out to be a shared result of three of the

four reviewed studies. These are namely the Rovere study, the Decature study as well as

the drug study that focussed on different fields of opinion leadership, as illustrated in

chapter 1 (ibid., pp. 63; ibid., pp. 69; ibid., pp. 75-76). Taking into account that the re-

search of this studies back-dates to the 1940s and 1950s, when diffusion of the mass

media itself was lower, the opinion leaders also had a further first mover advantage be-

sides faster acquisition and diffusion of information in the focussed realm (Roch 2005,

pp. 112). First mover advantage will also be an important aspect when talking about

market mavens in the following subchapter as well as doing research on social net-

works. Earlier exposure to social networks can strengthen the size of the leader’s net-

work justified on the basis of the time winning margin (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 10).

Additionally Robertson and Myers came, according to Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84

qtd.a. Robertson and Myers, 1969), to terms, that there are similarities between opinion

leaders and early adopters, as there are neither general early adopters, nor general opin-

ion leaders, both are narrowly focussed on a certain topic. Thus an opinion leader would

also be described as an expressive or influential early adopter, if the opinion leader

would fulfil the precondition of early owner- or user-ship of a product or service (Arndt

1967, pp. 292). In this case, the expertise that is usually based on mass media informa-

tion gets enriched with „[…] product usage or purchase experience.“ (Feick and Price

1987, pp. 84) Nevertheless Feick and Price (1987, p. 85) mention that ownership of the

judged product is rather an exceptional case. Usually the expertise in terms of judge-

ments on products, product related market insights and shopping place advices can also

be given without having made direct experience with either the shop or the product

(ibid.).


10 Besides from rather self-oriented constraints such as exposure to mass media (Katz

1957, p. 63) and product or subject involvement through product or subject interest

(Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84), there are several other necessary constraints, which let

become a person an opinion leader. Most of them mainly rely on the leader’s audience,

or his or her peers. (Later in this chapter it is being elaborated why the term ‚peer’ is

chosen, when sociometrics will be explained.) One of the most important constraints in

the context of interaction is that the opinion leader becomes socially active (Katz 1957,

pp. 74). According to Katz (1957, pp. 63) this happens by convincing peers of the own

opinion by either talking about the subject or being asked about it. If this precondition

gets combined with the audience’s interest and acceptance of the opinion, a leader-to-

follower dyad will arise. This moment enables the advice giving person to act as an

opinion leader for the limited domain of the subject of discussion (Katz 1957, pp. 74).

In this context Katz (1957, pp. 63) assumed in his study that it is rather similarity than

difference that creates a leader-to-follower(s) dyad. Doing further research, reviewing

the drug study, he found that doctors with similar sociometrics were more likely to

adopt a new drug earlier, following a leader’s prescription (Katz 1957, pp. 72). Even

besides these micro environments of person-to-person connections he found his as-

sumption acknowledged. One example of this purpose is the macro environments of

entire leader-to-follower webs of different social groups. The 1940s voting study for

example names the attribute that every social group has its own opinion leaders as a

major result (Katz 1957, pp. 72). In the Elmira study this result gets confirmed and re-

cessed saying that the horizontal flow of opinions is also valid for age or work classes

and clusters of the same political opinion (Katz 1957, pp. 73). Finally all these aspects

of similarity between leader and followers justify why the term peer is chosen in most

of the current studies such as the one of Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 441).

Apart from sociometrics an equal result is shown when taking the content of a specific

opinion leadership into focus. Similar to the property that opinion leaders are narrowly

focussed (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84), there is inversely no acceptance for an overall

opinion leadership across subjects among the followers (Katz 1957, pp. 73). Every in-

terest group has its own opinion leader(s). As Katz points out, the Rovere study also

found that there is a general classification between „[…] local affairs […]“ (ibid.) and

„[…] cosmopolitan affairs […]“ and different people are being asked for advice for dif-

ferent subjects. For example an older woman is more likely being asked for her opinion


11 if the peer searching information about the affairs of larger families. Contrary to that

unmarried and young women are asked for advice in terms of cinema advices or fashion

affairs (Katz 1957, pp. 73).

3.2 Market Mavens –

The First Ones to Know and the First Ones to Pass On The market maven concept shares it’s origin with the one of the opinion leader, as both

concepts are trying to explain processes of political information diffusion (Feick and

Price 1987, pp. 85). Thus market mavens can be installed in place of the stars of figure

1.1 (chapter 1) in the two step flow of communication and share many properties with

the opinion leaders. They collect and assess information from the mass media and pass

them on to a number of their peers by either initiating discussions or being asked for

information (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 83). Equal to opinion leaders they are seen as

influential for purchase decisions by their peers and according to this enjoy reputation

as information providers (ibid.). In terms of sociometrics such as gender, household

size, income and education they do not differ from their peers either (Goodey and East

2008, pp. 267). Further, similar to opinion leaders, that they do not necessarily need to

be an owner or user of the product or service they judge (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85).

Contrary to opinion leaders their knowledge is rather a broader than a deeper one and

the key to market mavenism seems to be rather market involvement, than product in-

volvement (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85). Feick and Price sum up the role of market

mavens as „[…] individuals who have information about many kinds of products,

places to shop, and other facets of market, and initiate discussions with consumers and

respond to request from consumers for market information.“ (2007, pp. 85). As men-

tioned in the previous chapter the motivation of opinion leaders to acquire information

about a product is interest in the product and maybe prospective ownership of it. The

motivation to help and guide others is mostly based their involvement (Feick and Price

1987, pp. 84-85). This marks an important difference to the motivation of market

mavens as the acquisition of information does not uniquely derive from own interest or

own intention to buy the product. It is mostly the anticipation to make use of the knowl-

edge in social interaction (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85). This idea is also supported by

the research done by Levy (1978, pp. 406) who points out that market mavens tend to

be the first to know, if new information are available. Additionally it finds support in

3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Market Mavens

12 the work of Richmond (1977, pp. 41) who mentions that the probability of making use

of information in public situations decides about their acquisition. According to Sieber

(1974, pp. 575) this also explains why broadness is more important than depth of infor-

mation, as their aim to strengthen their importance within their peer group can only be

achieved on a broad information base. Thus they tend to achieve a time margin rather

than an information margin if being compared to their peers or opinion leaders. On this

basis of assumption about market mavens two concepts have arose, that are namely the

market maven scale (MMS) by Feick and Price (1987) and the test of the market maven

concept by Goodey and East (2008).

The MMS identifies market mavens and opinion leaders by surveying their peers about

advice giving persons and the relevance for their shopping behaviour (Feick and Price

1987, pp. 87). To further separate the mavenism from opinion leadership five aspects

were found where market mavens score antipodal from opinion leaders as shown in

chart 3.2.1. According to Feick and Price mavens score high giving information on in-

novative products (ibid., pp. 89), the urge to publish their opinion and reading consumer

reports (ibid., pp. 86). Whereas opinion leaders score high in giving information on du-

rable products and product details as market mavens information base forces him to

become a „[…] passive diffuser of new product information […]“ (Elliot 1993, pp.

207). The result of Feick and Price’s research was that none of the assumptions could be

falsified, which shows contrary results to Goodey and East (2008, pp. 272), who advice

to critically review the MMS, because they found no significantly higher advice giving

behaviour of mavens compared to non-mavens.

Chart 3.2.1: Scores of Leadership and Mavenism in the MMS (Compiled by the Author)

Goodey and East (2008) researched if an overall set of the personality of market mavens

can be identified. Based on Clark and colleagues (2008, pp. 241) they assume that mav-


13 enism arises from a unique combination of the will to fulfil society’s expectations and a

high self-esteem. This is unique as the will to fulfil society’s expectations is usually

connected to a lower self-esteem (Goodey and East 2008, pp. 267). Ironically they seek

to be recognised by their peers as unique (ibid.) which is only possible by being ahead

of populace (Geissler and Edison 2005, pp. 88), thus being trend setters. Subsequently

the Goodey and East study consisted of originally seven mavenism properties to opera-

tionalise these findings. Expecting a high maven score the participants were assumed to

score high in self-esteem, extraversion, and agreeableness due to an expected fit to so-

cial and group situations. As well as high scores were expected in terms of materialism

and openness to experience due to their marketplace interest and frequently noticed

change of brands and products. The latter case also corresponds with a low expected

conscientiousness due to inconstant behaviour. Further low scores were expected in

terms of emotional stability due to their need of social calibration (Goodey and East

2008, pp. 269). Five of these categories were incorporated in the further analysis, with

extraversion and conscientiousness being sorted out (ibid., pp. 272). Agreeableness and

emotional stability displayed the most striking differences in the final run. As agree-

ableness is positively correlated with female mavenism and negative with male maven-

ism, whereas emotional stability shows an inverse picture (ibid., pp. 273). Openness,

self-esteem, and materialism showed a correlation only with male mavenism at a low

significance. Thus Goodey and East came to the conclusion that „[…] any overall pro-

file of a market maven could be misleading.“ (ibid., pp. 272). Additionally if the identi-

fied maven was a female owner of the product the motivation for female word of mouth

is mostly derived from happiness with the product and the will to pass this satisfaction

on to her peers and the likelihood of producing word of mouth is higher than the male

likelihood to do so (ibid., pp. 273). Which shows an equal behaviour of female mavens

and opinion leaders, the distinguishing effect in this case is that word of mouth produc-

tion is also used to restore emotional stability (ibid., pp. 274). Getting back to the advice

giving behaviour Goodey and East (2008, pp. 272) also found that the difference be-

tween men and women were also more significant than difference between mavens and

non-mavens, thus they recommend to do further research on the gap between male and

female mavens as they display two distinct personality bases (ibid., pp. 275).


14 3.3 Social Hubs –

Diffusion Through Central Points with Many Ties In chapters 3.1 and 3.2 of this work it has already been elaborated on the knowledge

based and persuasive or charismatic components of interpersonal influence. In this sub-

section the term of „whom one knows“ (Katz 1957, pp. 63) and thus the only rational,

namely mathematically countable part of interpersonal influence will be elaborated

(Goldenberg 2009, pp. 1). Asking the question for the social hub, no other question is

asked than how many social ties an individual has (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 2). Two

different studies will be focussed in this context. The drug study that has already been

reviewed in chapter 3.2 which will give a first impression and the study of Goldenberg

and colleagues (2009), which did deeper research on the role of hubs during adoption.

The drug study shows the diffusion of new drugs throughout entire webs of influence on

the basis of prescriptions and surveys answered by the acting doctors in the background.

Thus it made innovators and followers among the doctors visible (Katz 1957, pp. 69).

The result shows that the earlier the doctors adopted the drug, (thus the more innovative

their character is,) the more often they are mentioned by their fellows, (thus the better

their linkage is) (ibid., pp. 71). The reasons for the high correlation between innovator

ship and linkage are also given by Katz, who points out that the more the doctor keeps

contact with his peer community, the more state-of-the-art information he can acquire,

secondly that „[…] social support […]“ (Katz 1957, pp. 71) may strengthen the mental

attitude in favour of taking the risks of new drugs.

Goldenberg et. Al. (2009, pp. 3) firstly define a central position of a person within a

social network as one of the major preconditions to become a social hub, which itself is

a precondition to develop a large number of connections to neighbours. Further the

number of connections persons have determines their degree and makes Goldenberg

conclude that the degree and the centrality of a node (a person), are positively correlated

(ibid.). This also means that the efficiency of a hub and its centrality are positively cor-

related, as the hub’s efficiency rises with the hub’s degree (ibid.). The hub is finally

identified as a hyper connected node, meaning a node that is „[…] linked to a large

number of people.“ (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 6) If combining these properties with the

idea that connections are not necessarily broken if the direct link between two partici-

pants is damaged, hubs will serve as connection back-ups (ibid., pp. 3). Thus a hub is

3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Social Hubs

15 not necessarily connected to mass media. It can theoretically be any central highly con-

nected point within a web of interpersonal influence. According Goldenberg et.Al.

(2009, pp. 4) hub adoption is also mostly defined by the degree of a node, with the

number and speed of adoption rising faster the higher its degree is. For this purpose a

distinction between in- and out-degree of a hub has to be made to differentiate between

stimulus income, measured by in-degree and stimulus output, measured by out-degree.

This leads to the assumption by Goldenberg et.Al. that the out-degree has a major im-

pact on the adoption process (ibid.) which was later supported during research (ibid., pp.

7). Putting the view on the stimulus input of hubs another reason becomes visible why

hubs do speed up the overall process of adoption (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 8), as they are

earlier exposed to innovations and adopt earlier than usual consumers (ibid., pp. 1). The

latter case is either driven by certain a number of exposures or the fact of being con-

nected to innovators (ibid., pp. 7). Analysing the role of how hubs influence populace

two types of hubs can be identified. Innovator hubs need a lower rate of exposure to

adopt, which is a fixed digit threshold of two exposures in case of the Goldenberg study

(2007, pp. 3). Follower hubs need a higher rate of exposures, which were 10 in case of

the reviewed study (ibid.). Thus Goldenberg et.Al. assumed that the speed of adoption

is higher correlated with the innovators among the hubs (ibid., pp. 3), whereas followers

have a higher influence on market size (ibid., pp. 4). On one hand assumptions found

support in the results, as the innovator’s effect on the velocity of diffusion was two

times higher than the one of the follower (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 9). On the other hand

follower hubs have a seven times higher impact on market size than innovator hubs

(ibid.). This special role of the follower hubs marks an important difference between the

rather technical interpretation of social hubs and the psychological interpretation of

opinion leaders and market mavens. Market mavens and opinion leaders as shown in

chapters 3.1 and 3.2 allow flow of information mostly between people of similar so-

ciometrics, whereas Goldenberg et.Al. mention that follower hubs’ character is different

from the one of the innovator hubs and closer to the one of the average population. Thus

vertical flow aside from similar sociometrics is possible. This situation allows an in-

crease of market size (Goldenberg et. Al. 2009, pp. 4) and thus follower hubs will pro-

vide diffusion into mass market (ibid., pp. 9).

3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Social Hubs

16 4. Discussion

Getting back to the original question if there is a trait of being influential that can be

allocated to each of the concepts of personalised influence, „who one is“ (Katz 1957,

pp. 63) will be allocated to the concept of mavenism, „what one knows“ (ibid.) will go

with leadership and social hub activity will remain with „whom one knows“ (ibid.).

All these allocations have eligibility in parts of their justification. The broad (Feick and

Price 1987, pp. 85) and rapidly acquired (Levy 1978, pp. 406) knowledge of the market

maven combined with the urge to publish his opinion (Sieber 1974, pp. 575) suggests

that mavens must have a special capability to convince their peers even about rumour.

The narrowly focussed knowledge of opinion leaders (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84)

makes it possible to acquire a time margin compared to their peers, but as it needs time

to involve once self deeply with a certain topic, there will be no time margin achievable

compared to mavens. Thus opinion leaders will have to convince by knowledge. Yet

Katz (1957, pp. 69) does mention that leaders convince, but does not clearly mention

that it happens only because of knowledge. Furthermore even the whole concept of

mavenism lacks a clear definition, as a second try to prove the MMS failed (Goodey

and East 2008, pp. 272). Additionally Goodey and East found out that no overall con-

cept of mavenism could be identified beyond reasonable doubt (ibid.).

Social Hubs seem to be the only concept that can be allocated to the latter component of

influentialism, that is namely „[…] whom one knows […]“ (Katz 1957, pp. 63). The

properties of hubs are clearly mentioned in terms of location within the web, linkage to

peers and the earlier exposure. A central location is needed from which as many ties as

possible can be served (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 3). This is, reviewing the con-

straints, no other definition than the p-hub median problem that is used to find hubs for

hub and spoke systems in logistics (Campbell 1996, pp. 933; Mayer 2001, pp. 77)

Similar to hub and spoke systems that are built up to reduce costs, thus improving the

efficiency of distribution networks (Rodrigue et.Al. 2001, pp. 4) social hubs also en-

hance the efficiency of information diffusion by either increasing velocity (innovator

hubs) or market size (follower hubs) (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 9). The problem that re-

mains is the following: Being a social hub only is only one constraint to be fulfilled.

4. Discussion

17 Convincing others and knowing a lot are also needed to be mentioned among the influ-

entials.

Further comparing the disadvantages of hub and spoke systems in logistics to the ones

of diffusion networks, which is namely the increase in transportation time and the re-

straint to make detours (Bernsmann et.Al. 2007, pp. 9) may help to explain the multi

step flow of communication introduced by Watts and Dodds (2007). Being positively

mentioned by Goldenberg et.Al. (2009, pp. 3) that hubs provide connection back-ups if

the direct link is broken, implies on the other hand that a detour has to be made. Com-

bined with the fact that the classical two step flow lacks a feedback channel (Lazarsfeld

et.Al. 1948, pp. 151), and does not accommodate the increasing participation of the

former receivers that are more and more accorded the role of being influential in social

networks and on social news sites, the multi step flow gets closer to recent situations.

Adding futher the constraint mentioned by Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444) that diffu-

sion needs mostly easily influenceable people, contagion in the multi step flow comes

rather close to the way the diffusion of the dengue fever is propelled. The dengue fever

can be acquired by being bit by gnats or person-to-person airborne infection (n.A. 2005,

pp. 2). According to Ferreira (2005, pp. 8) the diffusion rate highly depends on sur-

roundings that are determined by the connectivity of the city and the domestic migration

in Brazil.

4. Discussion

I

Bibliography

Arndt, Johan (1967): Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 4, No. 3 (August), pp. 291-295. Bass, Frank M. (2004): Comments on ‚A New Product Growth of Model Consumer Durables’, in: Management Science, Vol. 50, No. 12 Supplement (December), pp. Bernsmann, Arnd; Buchholz, Peter; Heinrichmeyer, Hilmar; Jehle, Egon; Kessler, Stephan; Mehcic-Eberhardt, Sana; Müller, Dennis; von Haaren, Britta; Reinholz, An-dreas. (2007): Modellierung großer Netzwerke in der Logistik: Bewertungs- und Di-mensionierungsmethoden im Sonderforschungsbereich 559, in: Universität Dortmund, http://eldorado.tu-dortmund.de:8080/bitstream/2003/24364/1/Technical%20Report%2007002.pdf (State: 21.04.2010). Campbell, James F. (1996): Hub Location and the p-Hub Median Problem, in: Opera-tions Research, Vol. 44, No. 6 (November/December), pp. 923-935 Clark, Ronald A.; Goldsmith, Ronald E.; Goldsmith Elizabeth B. (2008): Market Mavens and consumer self-confidence, in: Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, and No. N/A (May/June) pp. 239-248 Elliot, Michael T.; Warfield, Anne E. (1993): Do Market Mavens Categorize Brands Differently Advances? in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, No. 1 (n/a), pp. 202-208 Flick, Lawrence F.; Price, Linda L. (1987): The Market Maven A Diffuser of Market-place Information, in Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, No. 1 (January), pp. 83- 97 Ferreira, Marcos. 2005. Spatial Diffusion of Dengue Fever Epidemics Occurring in South-eastern Brazil: A Methodology for Cartographic Modelling in GIS, in: Geo-sciences Institute of University of Caminos, Sao Paolo, Brazil, and http://www.cartesia.es/geodoc/icc2005/pdf/poster/TEMA26/MARCOS%20FERREIRA.pdf (State: 23.04.2010). Grislier, Gary L.; Edison Steve W. (2005): Market Maven’s Attitudes towards General Technology: Implications for Marketing Communications, in: Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 11, No. 2 (June), pp. 73-94 Goldenberg, Jacob; Han, Sandman; Lehman, Donald R.; Hong, Jade Wong (2009): The Role of Hubs in the Adoption Process, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73, No. 2 (March), pp. 1-13 Goody, Caroline; East, Robert. (2008): Testing the market maven concept, in: Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 24, and No. 3-4 (N/A), pp. 265-282. Katz, Elcho (1957): The Two-Step Flow of Communication, in: The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 1 (spring), pp. 61-78

Bibliography

II Keller, Ed; Berry, Jon (2003): The Influential – One American in Ten Tells the Other Nine How to Vote, Where o Eat, and What to Buy, in: Concentrated Knowledge for the Busy Executive. Vol. 25, No. 5 (May), pp. 1-8 Lazarsfeld, Paul F.; Berelson, Bernard; Gaudet, Hazel (1948): The people’s choice: How the Voter Makes Up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign, 2. Edition, New York NY: Columbia University Press. Levy, Mark R. (1978): Opinion Leadership and Television News Uses , in: The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn), pp. 402-406 Mayer, Gabriela (2001): Strategische Planung von Hub-&-Spoke-Systemen. 1. Auflage Wiesbaden: Gabler Edition – Deutscher Universitäts Verlag. o.V. 2005. Dengue Fieber, in: Labor Spiez www.labor-spiez.ch/de/dok/fa/pdf/dengue_fieber_d.pdf (State: 23.04.2010) Richmond, Virginia P. (1977): The Relationship Between Opinion Leadership and In-formation Acquisition, in: Human Communication Research, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Fall), pp. 38-43 Roch, Christine H. (2005): The Dual Roots of Opinion Leadership, in: The Journal of Politics, Vol. 67 No. 1 (February), pp. 110-131 Rodrigue, Jean-Paul; Slack, Brian; Comtois, Claude (2001): The Handbook of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 2. Edition, London: Pergamon/Elsevier Sieber, Sam D. (1974): Toward a Theory of Role Accumulation, in: American Socio-logical Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (August), pp. 567-578 Watts, Duncan J.; Dodds, Peter Sheridan (2007): Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34, No. 4 (December), pp. 441-458

Bibliography

I

Appendix

Appendix

II Appendix I: Descriptions of the big five personality domains of Market Mavens

Source: Goodey and East 2008, p. 268

Appendix I

III Appendix II: Ealy Theory Differences Between Early Purchaser, Opinion Leader, Market Maven & Social Hub

Source: Compiled by the author 2010

Appendix II

IV Appendix III:

a) Multi Step Flow of Communication

Source: Watts and Dodds 2007, p. 444

b) Diffusion of dengue fever in Brazil

Source: Ferreira 2005, p. 6

Appendix III

Ehrenwörtliche Erklärung Ich erkläre hiermit ehrenwörtlich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbständig angefertigt habe. Die aus fremden Quellen direkt oder indirekt übernommenen Aussagen sind als solche kenntlich gemacht. Die Arbeit wurde bisher keiner anderen Prüfungsbehörde vorgelegt und auch noch nicht veröffentlicht. Mainz, 29.04.2010 _______________________ Philipp J. Reis Absichtliche Fehlaussagen werden als Plagiat gewertet und können strafrechtliche Konsequenzen haben.

Reis 2010 - Opinion Leadership, Market Maven, Influential

Documents

Transcript of Reis 2010 - Opinion Leadership, Market Maven, Influential