Influencers! Old is new again

Professor Matthew Kushin, PhDShepherd University | Department of Mass Communication | 2012

I. Media’s limited effects:“The People’s Choice”

Paul Lazarsfeld Studied election campaign of 1940

Erie County, Ohio Field Experiment

1-time In-person Interview Panels

Repeated interviews May - Nov

Paul Lazarsfeld Focus:

Changes in voting decisions among public What causes those changes? What’s the media’s role in them?

Lazarsfeld’s 4 Types of changes Early Deciders

Chose a candidate in May & never changed mind.

4 Types of Changes Waverers

Chose 1 candidate then became undecided or switched, but came back to initial choice when voting

4 Types of Changes Converts

Chose 1 candidate but switched to vote for opposing candidate

4 Types of Changes Crystallizers

Had no candidate in May but decided by November Voting choice was predictable based on characteristics

Religion Where they lived Political party affiliation

Hypotheses If media has strong effects, Lazarsfeld could

hypothesize: H1: Most voters will be influenced by media causing

them to be wavers or converts H2: People who changed the most should have been

greatest users of media

Study’s Findings Most people never changed opinions

Early Deciders & Crystalizers Those who changed their minds were not

influenced by media Low media use Report being influenced by others

Study’s Conclusion Media’s main role:

Reinforce a voter’s candidate choice Activate predispositions

Party loyalties, political ideologies, religious affiliations

What is the possible connection here?

Heavy media users tended to be: Early-deciders

Light media users Heavily reliant on others for information Late deciders or converts

Connection Hypothesized:

Maybe the heavy users are the same people who the more apathetic voters relied on These heavy users may be knowledgeable & respected

people the apathetic voter looks up to Rather than being influenced by media, the heavy

user gains knowledge as ammunition to: back up their own opinion Influence others

II. Two-Step Flow

Two-Step Flow Messages pass from media to leaders. From leaders to many followers.

OpinionLeader

sOpinion

Followers

Two Step Flow Opinion leaders and followers are alike in their

social status Opinion leaders – more socially active, greater

media users, gregarious

Influencers: “Brand Evangelists” Not everyone on social media is equal in terms of

influenceBLOGGER TWEETER

Two Step

This Idea? Not New!

Opinion Leaders

Opinion Followe

r

Opinion Followe

r

Opinion Followe

r

Diffusion of Innovation Like the 2-step flow

Mass Media – Primary role to create awareness and knowledge about innovation

Interpersonal networks –Decision to adopt is highly influenced by discussion w/ peers who already adopted or rejected innovation.

Diffusion Asks: Why do some new ideas become adopted and

others don’t?

Diffusion Focus:

How new information becomes widely adopted States:

New ideas pass through a set of predictable stages

Diffusion Stages Media makes people aware of new idea Early adopters adopt innovation Early adopters influence opinion leaders who

adopt innovation Opinion leaders influence opinion followers Almost everyone has adopted

Some people lag behind

5 Adopter Types Classification of individuals by rate of adoption:

Innovators – venturesome; eager to try new ideas Early adopters – respectable localites; high degree

of opinion leadership within social system Early majority – interact frequently w/ peers but

seldom hold leadership positions (Cont’d next slide)

Late majority – skeptical; often adopt because of economic need or pressure from others

Laggards – Resist/reject. Oriented to past & tradition.

Typical Adopter Curve

Diffusion over Time

Innovation take-off

Change Agents professional who attempts to influence adoption

decisions in a direction he/she feels desirable Influences:

Early adopters Opinion leaders

PR folks are 1 type of changeagent

“Birds of a feather” Degree to which pairs of individuals who interact

are: Homophily - similar in certain attributes

High homophily b/w opinion leader & followers Heterophily –different

High heterophily between change agent and potential adopters

Path Change agents:

Often use local opinion leaders to assist in diffusion: to bridge heterophily gap using opinion leaders wide influence over others

Change Agent or Mass Media

Opinion Leader

Like-minded Follower

Like-minded Follower

Like-minded Follower

heterophily

homophily

Digital Influence

What’s your score? If you have a Klout, Kred, or PeerIndex score –

load it up so we can see it!

If you don’t: Goto: Tweetreach.com and type in your address.

What is digital influence? 1. Reach: The number of followers online 2. Voice: Number of posts in a given time period 3. Calculated as a score, such as on Klout.com 4. Number of interactions with others on social

media. 5. Something immeasurable.

Influence? What did you find? What does it mean?

If you don’t know – take a minute and see if you can find information on how the score is calculated or what the statistic on tweetreach.com means.

Kred’s ‘algorithm’ “Every person or account on Twitter has a Kred score, which is

made up of two parts: the influence score and the outreach score. Your influence score is a measure of your ability to inspire others. It is a number on a scale from 1 to 1,000, and is based on how often your tweets are retweeted, how many new followers you are gaining, and how many replies you generate. (Kred also looks at Facebook likes and Google +1s, but Twitter is the main source of data). It is very much like your Klout score. The Outreach score is measured in levels and is a reflection of how generous you are with retweeting and replying to others.

Kred also figures out which of 200 communities you belong to based on the information in your Twitter bio (which is not always a great description of who you are). It can show you the influence of your whole community and how you rank in that community”

Can digital influence be scored? Brian Solis states “Influence is not popularity and

popularity is not influence.”

Sites like “Klout” are controversial. People game these sites to increase their scores. PR people chase false influencers, wasting time!

Digital Diffusion Innovations diffuse in our highly networked world

today via social media. Problem:

How influence occurs through these online channels is debated, often unknown, and people are trying to make $ selling a ‘formula’ it to us

Looking Forward Next class we’ll start looking at digital influence How to find influencers (if its possible!) And explore what to do once we find them!