IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2308.09818.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Paths to Influence: How Coordinated Influence Operations Affect the Prominence of Ideas

Author

Listed:
  • Darren L. Linvill
  • Patrick L. Warren

Abstract

This paper presents four examples of different ways that coordinated influence operations exert pressure on the prominence of ideas on social networks. We argue that these examples illustrate the four archetypical paths to influence: promotion by strengthening, promotion by weakening, demotion by strengthening, and demotion by weakening. We formalize this idea in a stylized economic model of the optimal behavior of the influence operator and derive some predictions about when we should expect each path to be followed. Finally we sketch out how one might go about quantitatively estimating the key parameters of (a variant of) this model and how it applies much more broadly than in the international political influence examples that motivate it.

Suggested Citation

  • Darren L. Linvill & Patrick L. Warren, 2023. "Paths to Influence: How Coordinated Influence Operations Affect the Prominence of Ideas," Papers 2308.09818, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2308.09818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.09818
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dina Mayzlin & Yaniv Dover & Judith Chevalier, 2014. "Promotional Reviews: An Empirical Investigation of Online Review Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2421-2455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hui, Xiang & Klein, Tobias & Stahl, Konrad, 2022. "Learning from Online Ratings," CEPR Discussion Papers 17006, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. M. Narciso, 2022. "The Unreliability of Online Review Mechanisms," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 349-368, September.
    3. Inmaculada Rabadán-Martín & Francisco Aguado-Correa & Nuria Padilla-Garrido, 2020. "Online reputation of 4- and 5-star hotels," Tourism and Hospitality Management, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, vol. 26(1), pages 157-172, June.
    4. Pengkun Wu & Eric W. T. Ngai & Yuanyuan Wu, 2023. "Impact of praise cashback strategy: Implications for consumers and e‐businesses," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(9), pages 2825-2845, September.
    5. Sungsik Park & Woochoel Shin & Jinhong Xie, 2021. "The Fateful First Consumer Review," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 481-507, May.
    6. Boris Knapp, 2021. "Fake Reviews and Naive Consumers," Vienna Economics Papers 2102, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    7. Lingfang (Ivy) Li & Steven Tadelis & Xiaolan Zhou, 2020. "Buying reputation as a signal of quality: Evidence from an online marketplace," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 965-988, December.
    8. Plé, Loïc & Demangeot, Catherine, 2020. "Social contagion of online and offline deviant behaviors and its value outcomes: The case of tourism ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 886-896.
    9. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Zhuang, Mengzhou & Cui, Geng & Peng, Ling, 2018. "Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 24-35.
    11. Makoto Nakayama & Yun Wan, 2019. "Same sushi, different impressions: a cross-cultural analysis of Yelp reviews," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 181-207, June.
    12. Di Lizia, Adam, 2024. "Social Influence in Online Reviews : Evidence from the Steam Store," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1505, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    13. Rüdiger Bachmann & Gabriel Ehrlich & Ying Fan & Dimitrije Ruzic & Benjamin Leard, 2023. "Firms and Collective Reputation: a Study of the Volkswagen Emissions Scandal," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 484-525.
    14. Vollaard, Ben & van Ours, Jan C., 2022. "Bias in expert product reviews," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 105-118.
    15. Thaís L. D. Souza & Marislei Nishijima & Ana C. P. Fava, 2019. "Do consumer and expert reviews affect the length of time a film is kept on screens in the USA?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(1), pages 145-171, March.
    16. Hung-Pin Shih & Pei-Chen Sung, 2021. "Addressing the Review-Based Learning and Private Information Approaches to Foster Platform Continuance," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 649-661, June.
    17. Hanna Halaburda & Jeffrey Prince & D. Daniel Sokol & Feng Zhu, 2024. "The business revolution: Economy‐wide impacts of artificial intelligence and digital platforms," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 269-275, March.
    18. Surachartkumtonkun, Jiraporn (Nui) & Grace, Debra & Ross, Mitchell, 2021. "Unfair customer reviews: Third-party perceptions and managerial responses," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 631-640.
    19. Christoph Carnehl & Maximilian Schaefer & André Stenzel & Kevin Ducbao Tran, 2022. "Value for Money and Selection: How Pricing Affects Airbnb Ratings," Working Papers 684, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    20. Wen Zhang & Qiang Wang & Jian Li & Zhenzhong Ma & Gokul Bhandari & Rui Peng, 2023. "What makes deceptive online reviews? A linguistic analysis perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2308.09818. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.