Abstract
AbstractIdentifying influential people within a community to involve in a program is an important strategy of behavioral interventions. How to efficiently identify the most effective individuals is an outstanding question. This paper compares two common strategies: consulting ‘network insiders’ versus ‘network observers’ who have knowledge of but who do not directly participate in the community. Compared to aggregating information from all insiders, asking relatively fewer observers is more cost-effective, but may come at a cost of accuracy. We use data from a large-scale field experiment demonstrating that central students, identified through the aggregated nominations of students (insiders), reduced peer conflict in 56 middle schools. Teachers (observers) also identified students they saw as influential. We compare the causal effect of the two types of nominated students on peer outcomes and the differences between the two types of students. In contrast to the prosocial effects of central students on peer conflict, teacher nominees have no, or even antisocial, influence on their peers’ behaviors. Teachers (observers) generally nominated students with traits salient to them, suggesting that observer roles may systematically bias their perception. We discuss strategies for improving observers’ ability to identify influential individuals in a network as leverage for behavioral change.
Highlights
Identifying influential people – those who have a disproportionate ability to affect group- or community-wide behavior, norms or attitudes – has been a long-standing scholarly and practical interest
We present findings from a unique study that consulted both network insiders and network observers about influential people in a community
We find that the pool of teacher nominees overlaps very little with the pool of central students, and that the two groups of students differ in various ways
Summary
Identifying influential people – those who have a disproportionate ability to affect group- or community-wide behavior, norms or attitudes – has been a long-standing scholarly and practical interest. Individuals who belong to the network participate in the identification of influentials These network insiders can either directly nominate others they believe to be influential or provide information about their own network relationships (e.g., their friends) that researchers aggregate to identify central people. No study has compared the influence of central individuals identified using different methods, in terms of their causal impact on other network members or on the network as a whole. This question is best addressed using a multi-method assessment of influential individuals, paired with a randomized experiment that assesses the causal influence of central individuals by mobilizing a random subsample of them to change the attitudes, norms or behaviors of others in their network We leverage just such a design to assess the relative efficacy of insider- and observer-identified individuals. Teachers generally nominated students who were most salient to them, suggesting that observer roles may systematically bias their selection of influential individuals
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
