

Behavior Adoption on Social Networks: Two Models of Viral Growth - snakelemma
http://20bits.com/articles/behavior-adoption-on-social-networks/

======
stanleydrew
Model 1 is just FOMO (fear-of-missing-out), which I think is an
oversimplification.

~~~
jfarmer
I think FOMO is an instance of a psychological state described by that model.
There are others, e.g., checking out a site because all your friends update
their Facebook status with a link to it.

I don't know about "oversimplification," but it _is_ a model. It's not meant
to explain everything. :)

~~~
blader
Oh hey Jesse. Feels good to not be limited to 140 characters.

One thing I wanted to say is that the viral model does a really good job at
modeling user growth over time and the threshold model not so much.

I feel like the threshold model is more useful if used to model an increase in
_likelyhood_ of viral conversion based on penetration into their social graph.
(i.e. users with more friends active are more likely to convert from any given
organic/viral message they receive).

~~~
jfarmer
Hey Siqi.

Yeah, I don't have a clear idea of how these two models relate to the things
one would typically measure in "the industry." That's one thing I'm trying to
figure out because I believe fields like SNA, sociophysics, complex systems,
etc. can help us understand how to build better, more interesting, and more
sustainable social networks -- but AFAIK there's no communication between the
people forging new social networks and the people researching them.

But I do know this: Facebook has focused on density from very early on, which
is a key factor in the threshold model. Their strategy has always been depth
first, as opposed to many FB apps, which I think are breadth first. That is,
they go viral, but they spread far and wide without spending time building
sufficient density to become self-sustainable.

There's some formula like engagement = density*activity buried in there that I
can't quite pull out.

