Letter | Published:

A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization

Nature volume 489, pages 295298 (13 September 2012) | Download Citation

Abstract

Human behaviour is thought to spread through face-to-face social networks, but it is difficult to identify social influence effects in observational studies9,10,11,12,13, and it is unknown whether online social networks operate in the same way1419. Here we report results from a randomized controlled trial of political mobilization messages delivered to 61 million Facebook users during the 2010 US congressional elections. The results show that the messages directly influenced political self-expression, information seeking and real-world voting behaviour of millions of people. Furthermore, the messages not only influenced the users who received them but also the users’ friends, and friends of friends. The effect of social transmission on real-world voting was greater than the direct effect of the messages themselves, and nearly all the transmission occurred between ‘close friends’ who were more likely to have a face-to-face relationship. These results suggest that strong ties are instrumental for spreading both online and real-world behaviour in human social networks.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    & How adoption speed affects the abandonment of cultural tastes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 8146–8150 (2009)

  2. 2.

    et al. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science 323, 892–895 (2009)

  3. 3.

    , , & A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks. Nature 441, 502–505 (2006)

  4. 4.

    & Spontaneous emergence of social influence in online systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 18375–18380 (2010)

  5. 5.

    , , & Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature 481, 497–501 (2012)

  6. 6.

    & Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks. Science 337, 337–341 (2012)

  7. 7.

    An experimental study of homophily in the adoption of health behavior. Science 334, 1269–1272 (2011)

  8. 8.

    , , & The dynamics of protest recruitment through an online network. Sci. Rep. 1, 197 (2011)

  9. 9.

    & Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior. Preprint at (2011)

  10. 10.

    , & Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 21544–21549 (2009)

  11. 11.

    & The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 370–379 (2007)

  12. 12.

    & The dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network. Br. Med. J. 337, a2338 (2008)

  13. 13.

    & The collective dynamics of smoking in a large social network. N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 2249–2258 (2008)

  14. 14.

    , & Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311, 854–856 (2006)

  15. 15.

    The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science 329, 1194–1197 (2010)

  16. 16.

    & Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 5334–5338 (2010)

  17. 17.

    et al. Computational social science. Science 323, 721–723 (2009)

  18. 18.

    , & The benefits of facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 12, 1143–1168 (2007)

  19. 19.

    , , & Comparing community structure to characteristics in online collegiate social networks. SIAM Rev. 53, 526–543 (2011)

  20. 20.

    The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360–1380 (1973)

  21. 21.

    & Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives (Little, Brown, and Company, 2009)

  22. 22.

    Does email boost turnout? Q. J. Polit. Sci. 2, 369–379 (2007)

  23. 23.

    Political participation and effects from the social environment. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 36, 259–267 (1992)

  24. 24.

    & Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995)

  25. 25.

    & Does canvassing increase voter turnout? A field experiment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 10939–10942 (1999)

  26. 26.

    , & Social pressure and voter turnout: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 102, 33–48 (2008)

  27. 27.

    , , & Motivating voter turnout by invoking the self. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 12653–12656 (2011)

  28. 28.

    Is voting contagious? Evidence from two field experiments. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 102, 49–57 (2008)

  29. 29.

    et al. It's complicated: Facebook users' political participation in the 2008 election. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14, 107–114 (2011)

  30. 30.

    in The Social Logic of Politics: Personal Networks as Contexts for Political Behavior (ed. ) 269–287 (Temple Univ. Press, 2005)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to S. Aral, J. Berger, M. Cebrian, D. Centola, N. Christakis, C. Dawes, L. Gee, D. Green, C. Kam, P. Loewen, P. Mucha, J. P. Onnela, M. Porter, O. Smirnov and C. Volden for comments on early drafts. This work was supported in part by the James S. McDonnell Foundation, and the University of Notre Dame and the John Templeton Foundation as part of the Science of Generosity Initiative.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Political Science Department, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA

    • Robert M. Bond
    • , Christopher J. Fariss
    • , Jaime E. Settle
    •  & James H. Fowler
  2. Psychology Department, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA

    • Jason J. Jones
  3. Data Science, Facebook, Inc., Menlo Park, California 94025, USA

    • Adam D. I. Kramer
    •  & Cameron Marlow
  4. Medical Genetics Division, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA

    • James H. Fowler

Authors

  1. Search for Robert M. Bond in:

  2. Search for Christopher J. Fariss in:

  3. Search for Jason J. Jones in:

  4. Search for Adam D. I. Kramer in:

  5. Search for Cameron Marlow in:

  6. Search for Jaime E. Settle in:

  7. Search for James H. Fowler in:

Contributions

Author Contributions All authors contributed to study design, data collection, analysis and preparation of the manuscript. J.H.F. secured funding.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James H. Fowler.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    This file contains Supplementary Text and Data, Supplementary Tables 1-19, Supplementary Figures 1-6 and additional references.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11421

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.