IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22596.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Seeding the S-Curve? The Role of Early Adopters in Diffusion

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Catalini
  • Catherine Tucker

Abstract

In October 2014, all 4,494 undergraduates at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology were given access to Bitcoin, a decentralized digital currency. As a unique feature of the experiment, students who would generally adopt first were placed in a situation where many of their peers received access to the technology before them, and they then had to decide whether to continue to invest in this digital currency or exit. Our results suggest that when natural early adopters are delayed relative to their peers, they are more likely to reject the technology. We present further evidence that this appears to be driven by identity, in that the effect occurs in situations where natural early adopters' delay relative to others is most visible, and in settings where the natural early adopters would have been somewhat unique in their tech-savvy status. We then show not only that natural early adopters are more likely to reject the technology if they are delayed, but that this rejection generates spillovers on adoption by their peers who are not natural early adopters. This suggests that small changes in the initial availability of a technology have a lasting effect on its potential: Seeding a technology while ignoring early adopters' needs for distinctiveness is counterproductive.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Catalini & Catherine Tucker, 2016. "Seeding the S-Curve? The Role of Early Adopters in Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 22596, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22596
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22596.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raghuram Iyengar & Christophe Van den Bulte & Thomas W. Valente, 2011. "Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 195-212, 03-04.
    2. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    3. Ajay Agrawal & Christian Catalini & Avi Goldfarb, 2014. "Some Simple Economics of Crowdfunding," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-97.
    4. Edward L. Glaeser & Bruce Sacerdote & José A. Scheinkman, 1996. "Crime and Social Interactions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 111(2), pages 507-548.
    5. Xavier Vives, 1993. "How Fast do Rational Agents Learn?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(2), pages 329-347.
    6. Pesendorfer, Wolfgang, 1995. "Design Innovation and Fashion Cycles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 771-792, September.
    7. Fisher, Robert J & Price, Linda L, 1992. "An Investigation into the Social Context of Early Adoption Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(3), pages 477-486, December.
    8. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "How Does Popularity Information Affect Choices? A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 828-842, May.
    9. Sushil Bikhchandani & David Hirshleifer & Ivo Welch, 1998. "Learning from the Behavior of Others: Conformity, Fads, and Informational Cascades," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 151-170, Summer.
    10. Duncan J. Watts & Peter Sheridan Dodds, 2007. "Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 441-458, May.
    11. Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Shyam Gopinath & Sriram Venkataraman, 2010. "The Effects of Online User Reviews on Movie Box Office Performance: Accounting for Sequential Rollout and Aggregation Across Local Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 944-957, 09-10.
    12. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    13. Cindy Chan & Jonah Berger & Leaf Van Boven, 2012. "Identifiable but Not Identical: Combining Social Identity and Uniqueness Motives in Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(3), pages 561-573.
    14. Monic Sun & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Feng Zhu, 2012. "To Belong or to Be Different? Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in China," Working Papers 12-15, NET Institute, revised Oct 2012.
    15. Neil Gandal & Hanna Halaburda, 2016. "Can We Predict the Winner in a Market with Network Effects? Competition in Cryptocurrency Market," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, July.
    16. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    17. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    18. Rainer Böhme & Nicolas Christin & Benjamin Edelman & Tyler Moore, 2015. "Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(2), pages 213-238, Spring.
    19. Jonah Berger & Chip Heath, 2007. "Where Consumers Diverge from Others: Identity Signaling and Product Domains," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(2), pages 121-134, June.
    20. Juanjuan Zhang, 2010. "The Sound of Silence: Observational Learning in the U.S. Kidney Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 315-335, 03-04.
    21. Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Feng Zhu, 2011. "Group Size and Incentives to Contribute: A Natural Experiment at Chinese Wikipedia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1601-1615, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joshi, Kuhu & Joshi, Pramod Kumar & Khan, Md. Tajuddin & Kishore, Avinash, 2018. "Insights on the rapid adoption of Pusa 1121 basmati variety in North India," IFPRI discussion papers 1756, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Yosuke Uno & Akira Sonoda & Masaki Bessho, 2021. "The Economics of Privacy: A Primer Especially for Policymakers," Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 21-E-11, Bank of Japan.
    3. Christopher Henry & Kim Huynh & Gradon Nicholls, 2017. "Bitcoin Awareness and Usage in Canada," Staff Working Papers 17-56, Bank of Canada.
    4. Neil Gandal & Hanna Halaburda, 2016. "Can We Predict the Winner in a Market with Network Effects? Competition in Cryptocurrency Market," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, July.
    5. Ioanna Roussou & Emmanouil Stiakakis & Angelo Sifaleras, 2019. "An empirical study on the commercial adoption of digital currencies," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 223-259, December.
    6. Bäck, Asta & Hajikhani, Arash & Jäger, Angela & Schubert, Torben & Suominen, Arho, 2022. "Return of the Solow-paradox in AI? AI-adoption and firm productivity," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/1, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    7. Henry, Christopher S. & Huynh, Kim P. & Nicholls, Gradon, 2018. "Bitcoin awareness and usage in Canada," Journal of Digital Banking, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 2(4), pages 311-337, May.
    8. Albekov Adam Umarovich & Vovchenko Natalia Gennadyevna & Andreeva Olga Vladimirovna & Sichev Roman Alexandrovich, 2017. "Block Chain and Financial Controlling in the System of Technological Provision of Large Corporations," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3B), pages 3-12.

    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. Sinan Aral & Dylan Walker, 2014. "Tie Strength, Embeddedness, and Social Influence: A Large-Scale Networked Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1352-1370, June.
    2. Dunia López-Pintado & Duncan J. Watts, 2008. "Social Influence, Binary Decisions and Collective Dynamics," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(4), pages 399-443, November.
    3. Coby Morvinski & On Amir & Eitan Muller, 2017. "“Ten Million Readers Can’t Be Wrong!,” or Can They? On the Role of Information About Adoption Stock in New Product Trial," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 290-300, March.
    4. Chong (Alex) Wang & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Il-Horn Hann, 2018. "Socially Nudged: A Quasi-Experimental Study of Friends’ Social Influence in Online Product Ratings," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 641-655, September.
    5. David Godes & José C. Silva, 2012. "Sequential and Temporal Dynamics of Online Opinion," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 448-473, May.
    6. Tuan Q. Phan & David Godes, 2018. "The Evolution of Influence Through Endogenous Link Formation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 259-278, March.
    7. Langley, David J. & Hoeve, Maarten C. & Ortt, J. Roland & Pals, Nico & van der Vecht, Bob, 2014. "Patterns of Herding and their Occurrence in an Online Setting," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 16-25.
    8. Christopher J. Blackburn & Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Juan Moreno‐Cruz, 2020. "Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work? Evidence from a Green Building Program," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1100-1132, September.
    9. Jurui Zhang & Yong Liu & Yubo Chen, 2015. "Social Learning in Networks of Friends versus Strangers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 573-589, July.
    10. repec:dgr:rugccs:200314 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Celen, Bogachan & Hyndman, Kyle, 2006. "Endogenous Network Formation In the Laboratory," MPRA Paper 1440, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Shijie Lu & Dai Yao & Xingyu Chen & Rajdeep Grewal, 2021. "Do Larger Audiences Generate Greater Revenues Under Pay What You Want? Evidence from a Live Streaming Platform," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(5), pages 964-984, September.
    13. Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Yunchuan Liu, 2014. "Consumer Learning on Social Networks and Retailer Digital Platform Strategies Access," Working Papers 14-02, NET Institute.
    14. Sushil Bikhchandani & David Hirshleifer & Omer Tamuz & Ivo Welch, 2024. "Information Cascades and Social Learning," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1040-1093, September.
    15. Maecker, Olaf & Grabenströer, Nadja Sophia & Clement, Michel & Heitmann, Mark, 2013. "Charts and demand: Empirical generalizations on social influence," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 429-431.
    16. Nejad, Mohammad G. & Amini, Mehdi & Babakus, Emin, 2015. "Success Factors in Product Seeding: The Role of Homophily," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 68-88.
    17. Tian, Xin & Song, Yan & Luo, Chunlin & Zhou, Xiaoyang & Lev, Benjamin, 2021. "Herding behavior in supplier innovation crowdfunding: Evidence from Kickstarter," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    18. Adriaan R. Soetevent, 2006. "Empirics of the Identification of Social Interactions; An Evaluation of the Approaches and Their Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 193-228, April.
    19. Silvio Vismara, 2018. "Information Cascades among Investors in Equity Crowdfunding," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(3), pages 467-497, May.
    20. Jin Huang, 2017. "To Glance or to Peruse: Observational and Active Learning from Peer Consumers," Working Papers wp2018_1716, CEMFI.
    21. Jin Huang, 2017. "To Glance or to Peruse: Observational and Active Learning from Peer Consumers," Working Papers wp2017_1716, CEMFI.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • G29 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Other
    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • M3 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:22596. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.