Ein Vergleich der Konzepte

„ Opinion Leadership “, „Market Maven“, „Social Hub “ und „Influential“

Seminararbeit

eingereicht bei:
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Oliver P. Heil

von: Philipp J. Reis

Matrikel-Nr. 26 24 33 9
philippreis@yahoo.de
Studiengang Wirtschaftspädagogik
11. Semester
Lessingstraße 13a
55118 Mainz
Telefon: +49 1 76 / 26 08 25 29

Abgabetermin: 30. April 2010

Abstract

Since the early studies of Katz (1957, pp. 63) influencing persons of an opinion is a
combination of persuasiveness, knowledge and social linkage. Since Lazarsfeld and his
colleagues (1948) developed the idea of the two step flow of communication several
definitions have arose. The three most frequently mentioned are opinion leaders, market
mavens and social hubs.
This paper firstly elaborates on the role of influence comparing two step flow and multi
step flow of communication showing that web 2.0 environments will more likely turn
receivers of the two step flow into stake holders of the multi step flow (Watts and
Dodds 2007, pp. 444). The different concepts of leadership, mavenism and the social
hubs will be characterised on the basis of empirical studies or computer simulated stud-
ies. Opinion leadership and market mavenism will be introduced firstly by the studies of
their initiators (Katz & Feick and Price) and will be reviewed by subsequent studies if
available. The study by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009) elaborating on social hubs
can itself be seen as a critical review of the study of Watts and Dodds (2007) being in-
troduced in context with interpersonal influence. This paper will further demonstrate
that both the social hub study as well as the contagion process in the multi step of com-
munication can be related to studies in logistics and medical science.

Keywords:
Influential, Opinion Leader, Market Maven, Social Hub, Two Step Flow of Communi-
cation, Multi Step Flow of Communication
 1

Table of Contents

Table of Figures 2

Table of Charts 3

1. Introduction 4

2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials 5

3. The Different Concepts of Being Influential 8

3.1 Opinion Leaders –
Intermediates between the mass media and the public 8
3.2 Market Mavens –
The First Ones to Know and the First Ones to Pass On 11
3.3 Social Hubs –
Diffusion Through Central Points with Many Ties 14

4. Discussion 16

Bibliography

Appendix
 2

Table of Figures

Figure 1.1: The Two Step Flow of Communication 6

Figure 1.2: The Multi Step Flow of Communication 7

 3

Table of Charts

Chart 3.1: Scores of Leadership and Mavenism in the MMS 12

1. Introduction 4

1. Introduction

To successfully exert influence on somebody three questions need to be answered. The

first one deals with his or her strength to convince people and is also connected to the
charismatic character of a person. Secondly arguments of persuasion and thus the per-
son’s knowledge are being studied and finally his or her network of influence, meaning
how many others can be influenced (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 1). This has been and
is still topic of most studies since the 1940s voting study gave go-ahead for the two step
flow of communication, developed by Lazarsfeld, Katz and Berelson (1948), that will
be introduced in chapter 2 analysing influentials and the function of being influential to
somebody. This chapter also offers a critical view on the two step flow by reviewing the
study of Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 455) who suggested that the role of influentials
may be overrated.

Opinion leadership was the first concept that arose from personifying influence, but the
blurring definition of this early concept may have led to disjoin the original concept into
three sub concepts (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84). These sub concepts are currently
known as opinion leaders, market mavens and social hubs (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp.
1) and will be elaborated in chapter 3. Starting with opinion leaders (chapter 3.1), the
concept will be approached with the study of Katz who chose the 1940s voting study to
identify leaders and their followers along the timeline (Katz 1957, pp. 63). Further Katz
(1957, pp. 66) tried to identify opinion leaders on the basis of how often they have been
mentioned by their peers taking the Rovere study into account. Going deeper into mi-
cro-relationships of person-to-person relations and assessing the „[…] relative impor-
tance of personal influence […]“ he analysed the Decatur study (ibid.). The drug study
was added to his research analysing the relationships between opinion leaders (Katz
1957, pp. 75-76), thus reconstructing the flow of information throughout entire net-
works (ibid., pp. 69). Market mavenism (chapter 3.2) will be reviewed by comparing
the results of Feick and Price (1987) who designed the Market Maven Scale (MMS) and
Goodey and East who reviewed the MMS and did research on range of advice by com-
paring a self designed mavenism scale to the „[…]self-reported advice[…]“ (Goodey
and East 2008, pp. 265) of mavens. Gender- and motivation based mavenism has also
been tested by comparing the results between high and low mavenism score in the latter
case (ibid.) in order to find an overall set of mavenism characteristics (ibid., pp. 268).
2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials 5

Finally the characteristics of social hubs (chapter 3.3) will be analysed. This will be
done by once again reviewing the drug study that gave several basic ideas for the con-
cept of the social hub. These basic ideas will be used to lead over to the most recent
study about social hubs by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009) that tested the role of hub
diffusion on the example of the Korean social network Cyworld by analysing computer
simulated models. This work can be seen as a reaction to the work of Watts and Dodds
(Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 7).

In Chapter 4 the characteristics of opinion leaders, market mavens and social hubs are
outlined to answer the question of this paper trying to relate leadership, mavenism and
hubs to the terms of charisma, knowledge and linkage. It also gives an answer if these
concepts have relations to the origins of their vocabulary in medical science and logis-
tics.

2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials

The assumption of the existence of influentials that represent a small number of people
who influence a remarkable number of their peers (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441) is
based on the two step flow of communication that was developed by Lazarsfeld et.Al.
(1948, pp. 151). It suggests that information firstly flow from the mass media to so
called opinion leaders as shown in figure 1.1 (ibid.) which, including their sub concepts,
will be explained in the following chapter. These opinion leaders act as multipliers be-
tween the mass media and the public. The model does not rule out direct media-to-
audience contact, but suggests that the number of influenced people can be enhanced by
addressing opinion leaders that are shown as stars in figure 1.1 (Watts and Dodds 2007,
pp. 441; Katz 1957, pp. 61). For this purpose three preconditions, which have already
been mentioned in chapter 1, need to be fulfilled when being influential to others. These
are charisma, or other personality traits bearing convincing strength, knowledge and
linkage (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 1). Since the publication of the people’s choice in
1948 by Lazarsfeld and colleagues and supposedly for a long time to come the two step
flow is claimed the standard model to explain how information diffusion is propelled
(Roch 2005, pp. 110). Thus intensive research on the impact of this model on market
research and the implementation into the marketing process took place and several mo-
dels of influence were found (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441).
2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials 6

Figure 1.1: The Two Step Flow of Communication

(Compiled by the Author, party adopted from Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 441)

The two step flow has also been controversially discussed as there is, according to
Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444), still no generally accepted, empirical definition of an
influential. Two basic models are named to define influentials in terms of peers they
influence. Classical theories, like those by Coleman (1957), Merton (1968) and Burson-
Marsteller (2001) that are mentioned by Watts and Dodds, for example name fixed fig-
ures ranging from three to 14 influenced peers as a critical figure for influentialism.
Newer studies like those of Keller and Berry (2003, pp. 4) or Coulter et.Al. (2002) use
relative criteria ranging from 10% to 32% of the top opinion leaders as influential
(Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444). Watts and Dodds for example opt for the top-10% -
rule, which has lately been criticised by Goldenberg and colleagues (2009, pp. 3-4) who
opted for a fixed digit threshold. Their justification says that peer networks of opinion
leaders have different sizes, thus a leader in a larger network needs more follower peers
than in a small web with the result of different definitions of an influential (Goldenberg
et.Al. 2009, pp. 4). The models that emerge from both studies are also further distinct
and can be seen as the latest step of this ongoing discussion. Watts and Dodds (2007,
pp. 442) tend to continue the way of the Bass model (1969) saying that opinion leaders
and thus influentials are not obligatory for diffusion (Bass 2004, pp. 1835). Therefrom
they act on the assumption of a multi step flow of communication, that factors in
broadcasting in it’s lexically sense, thus the content transmitted by the mass media can
be received and recognised by every participant (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444). This
fact is symbolised by farther concentrical waves in figure 1.2 than in figure 1.1. Con-
trary to the two step flow of communication it also considers a feedback channel among
2. Interpersonal Influence and the Role of Influentials 7

the participants and direct connections between peers like shown by the red arrows in
figure 1.2, which turns the receivers of the two step flow into stake holders of the multi
step flow (ibid.). The result shows a network that still has some hubs, that still handle
many person’s opinions besides the own, as the knots 1 und 3 in figure 1.2. But opinion
leaders or influentials can not be identified as such anymore as opinions can also be
carried from one sub network to the other, like via knot 2 in figure 1.2 (Watts and
Dodds 2007, pp. 443-444).

Figure 1.2: The Multi Step Flow of Communication

(Compiled by the Author, party adopted from Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 444)

Thus the research done by Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444) bases on the assumption of
cascades that have emerged from a stimulus and keep on infecting other easily influ-
enceable peers. In this kind of contagion model two types of cascades are conceivable.
Local cascades have a maximum range of „[…] one or two steps of the initiator.“
(Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 445), whereas the chance to infect the whole web remains
with only global cascades whose only limit is the size of the entire network (Watts and
Dodds 2007, pp. 445). To elaborate on their assumption of relevance or irrelevance of
influentials they compared cascades initiated by influentials with those of average per-
son’s origin (ibid.). Their results show that the role of influentials has been overrated as
average people have been equally successful in either initiating cascades or early adopt-
ing (ibid., pp. 453). According to Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 454) an influential is not
mandatory for the diffusion of information or innovation within and through networks.
Other facts like the size and property of the cascade window that defines the time slot
for successful cascades or the network density are much more important (ibid., pp. 445).
Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 453-454) do not deny the concept of persons, that are way
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Opinion Leaders 8

more influent than the average population of a network, but they point out that they are
not a necessary constraint for releasing a cascade.

Goldenberg et.Al. (2009, pp. 4) remain with the snow ball model assumption of hubs
that enhance the speed of adoption and the size of the network in a classical two step
flow of communication which will be deeper analysed in chapter 3.3 of this work. Their
results are contrary to Watts and Dodds, as they found out that hubs can enhance both
speed and size of a network and thus diffusion of information is getting faster and far-
ther carried (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 10).

3. The Different Concepts of Being Influential

3.1 Opinion Leaders –

Intermediates Between the Mass Media and the Public

First findings about opinion leaders back-date to 1948, when Lazarsfeld and colleagues
did research on the presidential campaign of 1940 in the United States (Feick und Price
1987, pp. 83 qtd.a. Lazarsfeld et.Al. 1948). According to Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84)
Lazarsfeld et.Al. found out that opinion leaders can be seen as „[…] information bro-
kers intervening between mass media sources and the opinion and choices of the popu-
lation.“ (ibid.). This implies that opinion leaders are not lexically leaders, meant in the
sense of publicly known leaders or personalities, that usually have impact on the mass
media themselves (Watts and Dodds 2007, pp. 442 qtd.a. Grewal et. Al. 2000, pp. 230).
As already mentioned in the previous chapter they are the crucial part in the two step
flow of communication.
The two step flow does not rule out direct media-to-audience contact, yet the efficiency
of information diffusion via opinion leaders is higher (Katz 1957, pp. 61). This is being
justified by a higher credibility of interpersonal sources compared to nonpersonal ones
(Feick and Price 1987, pp. 83 qtd.a. Assael, Etgar and Henry 1983). Additionally opin-
ion leaders are exposed to the mass media earlier in the campaign and the likelihood of
changing the opinion in favour of the leader is higher than turning away from it (Katz
1957, pp. 72). Taking the Decature study into account, Katz (1957, pp. 71) also found
arguments that person-to-person communication is not only more effective, than mass
media-to-person communication in terms of higher frequency. It is also more effective
in terms of sustainability as it is rather unlikely that a peer, after being influenced by his
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Opinion Leaders 9

leader changes his opinion once more (ibid., pp. 72). Furthermore a later direct contact
between the influenced peer and the mass media is more likely to be used as a re-
validation for his opinion (ibid., pp. 72).
Taking a deeper look on the properties of opinion leaders Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84)
elaborated mostly on the informational margin they have compared to their influencees.
One possibility to develop this information base is extensive interest in a subject of
choice, which is also the main motivation to advice peers (ibid.). This assumption is
also backed by Katz (1957, pp. 75), who mentions that leaders are steadily exposed to
several topic related mass media what he points out to be a shared result of three of the
four reviewed studies. These are namely the Rovere study, the Decature study as well as
the drug study that focussed on different fields of opinion leadership, as illustrated in
chapter 1 (ibid., pp. 63; ibid., pp. 69; ibid., pp. 75-76). Taking into account that the re-
search of this studies back-dates to the 1940s and 1950s, when diffusion of the mass
media itself was lower, the opinion leaders also had a further first mover advantage be-
sides faster acquisition and diffusion of information in the focussed realm (Roch 2005,
pp. 112). First mover advantage will also be an important aspect when talking about
market mavens in the following subchapter as well as doing research on social net-
works. Earlier exposure to social networks can strengthen the size of the leader’s net-
work justified on the basis of the time winning margin (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 10).
Additionally Robertson and Myers came, according to Feick and Price (1987, pp. 84
qtd.a. Robertson and Myers, 1969), to terms, that there are similarities between opinion
leaders and early adopters, as there are neither general early adopters, nor general opin-
ion leaders, both are narrowly focussed on a certain topic. Thus an opinion leader would
also be described as an expressive or influential early adopter, if the opinion leader
would fulfil the precondition of early owner- or user-ship of a product or service (Arndt
1967, pp. 292). In this case, the expertise that is usually based on mass media informa-
tion gets enriched with „[…] product usage or purchase experience.“ (Feick and Price
1987, pp. 84) Nevertheless Feick and Price (1987, p. 85) mention that ownership of the
judged product is rather an exceptional case. Usually the expertise in terms of judge-
ments on products, product related market insights and shopping place advices can also
be given without having made direct experience with either the shop or the product
(ibid.).
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Opinion Leaders 10

Besides from rather self-oriented constraints such as exposure to mass media (Katz
1957, p. 63) and product or subject involvement through product or subject interest
(Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84), there are several other necessary constraints, which let
become a person an opinion leader. Most of them mainly rely on the leader’s audience,
or his or her peers. (Later in this chapter it is being elaborated why the term ‚peer’ is
chosen, when sociometrics will be explained.) One of the most important constraints in
the context of interaction is that the opinion leader becomes socially active (Katz 1957,
pp. 74). According to Katz (1957, pp. 63) this happens by convincing peers of the own
opinion by either talking about the subject or being asked about it. If this precondition
gets combined with the audience’s interest and acceptance of the opinion, a leader-to-
follower dyad will arise. This moment enables the advice giving person to act as an
opinion leader for the limited domain of the subject of discussion (Katz 1957, pp. 74).
In this context Katz (1957, pp. 63) assumed in his study that it is rather similarity than
difference that creates a leader-to-follower(s) dyad. Doing further research, reviewing
the drug study, he found that doctors with similar sociometrics were more likely to
adopt a new drug earlier, following a leader’s prescription (Katz 1957, pp. 72). Even
besides these micro environments of person-to-person connections he found his as-
sumption acknowledged. One example of this purpose is the macro environments of
entire leader-to-follower webs of different social groups. The 1940s voting study for
example names the attribute that every social group has its own opinion leaders as a
major result (Katz 1957, pp. 72). In the Elmira study this result gets confirmed and re-
cessed saying that the horizontal flow of opinions is also valid for age or work classes
and clusters of the same political opinion (Katz 1957, pp. 73). Finally all these aspects
of similarity between leader and followers justify why the term peer is chosen in most
of the current studies such as the one of Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 441).

Apart from sociometrics an equal result is shown when taking the content of a specific
opinion leadership into focus. Similar to the property that opinion leaders are narrowly
focussed (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84), there is inversely no acceptance for an overall
opinion leadership across subjects among the followers (Katz 1957, pp. 73). Every in-
terest group has its own opinion leader(s). As Katz points out, the Rovere study also
found that there is a general classification between „[…] local affairs […]“ (ibid.) and
„[…] cosmopolitan affairs […]“ and different people are being asked for advice for dif-
ferent subjects. For example an older woman is more likely being asked for her opinion
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Market Mavens 11

if the peer searching information about the affairs of larger families. Contrary to that
unmarried and young women are asked for advice in terms of cinema advices or fashion
affairs (Katz 1957, pp. 73).

3.2 Market Mavens –

The First Ones to Know and the First Ones to Pass On

The market maven concept shares it’s origin with the one of the opinion leader, as both
concepts are trying to explain processes of political information diffusion (Feick and
Price 1987, pp. 85). Thus market mavens can be installed in place of the stars of figure
1.1 (chapter 1) in the two step flow of communication and share many properties with
the opinion leaders. They collect and assess information from the mass media and pass
them on to a number of their peers by either initiating discussions or being asked for
information (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 83). Equal to opinion leaders they are seen as
influential for purchase decisions by their peers and according to this enjoy reputation
as information providers (ibid.). In terms of sociometrics such as gender, household
size, income and education they do not differ from their peers either (Goodey and East
2008, pp. 267). Further, similar to opinion leaders, that they do not necessarily need to
be an owner or user of the product or service they judge (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85).

Contrary to opinion leaders their knowledge is rather a broader than a deeper one and
the key to market mavenism seems to be rather market involvement, than product in-
volvement (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85). Feick and Price sum up the role of market
mavens as „[…] individuals who have information about many kinds of products,
places to shop, and other facets of market, and initiate discussions with consumers and
respond to request from consumers for market information.“ (2007, pp. 85). As men-
tioned in the previous chapter the motivation of opinion leaders to acquire information
about a product is interest in the product and maybe prospective ownership of it. The
motivation to help and guide others is mostly based their involvement (Feick and Price
1987, pp. 84-85). This marks an important difference to the motivation of market
mavens as the acquisition of information does not uniquely derive from own interest or
own intention to buy the product. It is mostly the anticipation to make use of the knowl-
edge in social interaction (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 85). This idea is also supported by
the research done by Levy (1978, pp. 406) who points out that market mavens tend to
be the first to know, if new information are available. Additionally it finds support in
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Market Mavens 12

the work of Richmond (1977, pp. 41) who mentions that the probability of making use
of information in public situations decides about their acquisition. According to Sieber
(1974, pp. 575) this also explains why broadness is more important than depth of infor-
mation, as their aim to strengthen their importance within their peer group can only be
achieved on a broad information base. Thus they tend to achieve a time margin rather
than an information margin if being compared to their peers or opinion leaders. On this
basis of assumption about market mavens two concepts have arose, that are namely the
market maven scale (MMS) by Feick and Price (1987) and the test of the market maven
concept by Goodey and East (2008).

The MMS identifies market mavens and opinion leaders by surveying their peers about
advice giving persons and the relevance for their shopping behaviour (Feick and Price
1987, pp. 87). To further separate the mavenism from opinion leadership five aspects
were found where market mavens score antipodal from opinion leaders as shown in
chart 3.2.1. According to Feick and Price mavens score high giving information on in-
novative products (ibid., pp. 89), the urge to publish their opinion and reading consumer
reports (ibid., pp. 86). Whereas opinion leaders score high in giving information on du-
rable products and product details as market mavens information base forces him to
become a „[…] passive diffuser of new product information […]“ (Elliot 1993, pp.
207). The result of Feick and Price’s research was that none of the assumptions could be
falsified, which shows contrary results to Goodey and East (2008, pp. 272), who advice
to critically review the MMS, because they found no significantly higher advice giving
behaviour of mavens compared to non-mavens.

Chart 3.2.1: Scores of Leadership and Mavenism in the MMS (Compiled by the Author)
Goodey and East (2008) researched if an overall set of the personality of market mavens
can be identified. Based on Clark and colleagues (2008, pp. 241) they assume that mav-
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Market Mavens 13

enism arises from a unique combination of the will to fulfil society’s expectations and a
high self-esteem. This is unique as the will to fulfil society’s expectations is usually
connected to a lower self-esteem (Goodey and East 2008, pp. 267). Ironically they seek
to be recognised by their peers as unique (ibid.) which is only possible by being ahead
of populace (Geissler and Edison 2005, pp. 88), thus being trend setters. Subsequently
the Goodey and East study consisted of originally seven mavenism properties to opera-
tionalise these findings. Expecting a high maven score the participants were assumed to
score high in self-esteem, extraversion, and agreeableness due to an expected fit to so-
cial and group situations. As well as high scores were expected in terms of materialism
and openness to experience due to their marketplace interest and frequently noticed
change of brands and products. The latter case also corresponds with a low expected
conscientiousness due to inconstant behaviour. Further low scores were expected in
terms of emotional stability due to their need of social calibration (Goodey and East
2008, pp. 269). Five of these categories were incorporated in the further analysis, with
extraversion and conscientiousness being sorted out (ibid., pp. 272). Agreeableness and
emotional stability displayed the most striking differences in the final run. As agree-
ableness is positively correlated with female mavenism and negative with male maven-
ism, whereas emotional stability shows an inverse picture (ibid., pp. 273). Openness,
self-esteem, and materialism showed a correlation only with male mavenism at a low
significance. Thus Goodey and East came to the conclusion that „[…] any overall pro-
file of a market maven could be misleading.“ (ibid., pp. 272). Additionally if the identi-
fied maven was a female owner of the product the motivation for female word of mouth
is mostly derived from happiness with the product and the will to pass this satisfaction
on to her peers and the likelihood of producing word of mouth is higher than the male
likelihood to do so (ibid., pp. 273). Which shows an equal behaviour of female mavens
and opinion leaders, the distinguishing effect in this case is that word of mouth produc-
tion is also used to restore emotional stability (ibid., pp. 274). Getting back to the advice
giving behaviour Goodey and East (2008, pp. 272) also found that the difference be-
tween men and women were also more significant than difference between mavens and
non-mavens, thus they recommend to do further research on the gap between male and
female mavens as they display two distinct personality bases (ibid., pp. 275).
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Social Hubs 14

3.3 Social Hubs –

Diffusion Through Central Points with Many Ties

In chapters 3.1 and 3.2 of this work it has already been elaborated on the knowledge
based and persuasive or charismatic components of interpersonal influence. In this sub-
section the term of „whom one knows“ (Katz 1957, pp. 63) and thus the only rational,
namely mathematically countable part of interpersonal influence will be elaborated
(Goldenberg 2009, pp. 1). Asking the question for the social hub, no other question is
asked than how many social ties an individual has (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 2). Two
different studies will be focussed in this context. The drug study that has already been
reviewed in chapter 3.2 which will give a first impression and the study of Goldenberg
and colleagues (2009), which did deeper research on the role of hubs during adoption.

The drug study shows the diffusion of new drugs throughout entire webs of influence on
the basis of prescriptions and surveys answered by the acting doctors in the background.
Thus it made innovators and followers among the doctors visible (Katz 1957, pp. 69).
The result shows that the earlier the doctors adopted the drug, (thus the more innovative
their character is,) the more often they are mentioned by their fellows, (thus the better
their linkage is) (ibid., pp. 71). The reasons for the high correlation between innovator
ship and linkage are also given by Katz, who points out that the more the doctor keeps
contact with his peer community, the more state-of-the-art information he can acquire,
secondly that „[…] social support […]“ (Katz 1957, pp. 71) may strengthen the mental
attitude in favour of taking the risks of new drugs.

Goldenberg et. Al. (2009, pp. 3) firstly define a central position of a person within a
social network as one of the major preconditions to become a social hub, which itself is
a precondition to develop a large number of connections to neighbours. Further the
number of connections persons have determines their degree and makes Goldenberg
conclude that the degree and the centrality of a node (a person), are positively correlated
(ibid.). This also means that the efficiency of a hub and its centrality are positively cor-
related, as the hub’s efficiency rises with the hub’s degree (ibid.). The hub is finally
identified as a hyper connected node, meaning a node that is „[…] linked to a large
number of people.“ (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 6) If combining these properties with the
idea that connections are not necessarily broken if the direct link between two partici-
pants is damaged, hubs will serve as connection back-ups (ibid., pp. 3). Thus a hub is
3. The Different Concepts of Being Infuential: Social Hubs 15

not necessarily connected to mass media. It can theoretically be any central highly con-
nected point within a web of interpersonal influence. According Goldenberg et.Al.
(2009, pp. 4) hub adoption is also mostly defined by the degree of a node, with the
number and speed of adoption rising faster the higher its degree is. For this purpose a
distinction between in- and out-degree of a hub has to be made to differentiate between
stimulus income, measured by in-degree and stimulus output, measured by out-degree.
This leads to the assumption by Goldenberg et.Al. that the out-degree has a major im-
pact on the adoption process (ibid.) which was later supported during research (ibid., pp.
7). Putting the view on the stimulus input of hubs another reason becomes visible why
hubs do speed up the overall process of adoption (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 8), as they are
earlier exposed to innovations and adopt earlier than usual consumers (ibid., pp. 1). The
latter case is either driven by certain a number of exposures or the fact of being con-
nected to innovators (ibid., pp. 7). Analysing the role of how hubs influence populace
two types of hubs can be identified. Innovator hubs need a lower rate of exposure to
adopt, which is a fixed digit threshold of two exposures in case of the Goldenberg study
(2007, pp. 3). Follower hubs need a higher rate of exposures, which were 10 in case of
the reviewed study (ibid.). Thus Goldenberg et.Al. assumed that the speed of adoption
is higher correlated with the innovators among the hubs (ibid., pp. 3), whereas followers
have a higher influence on market size (ibid., pp. 4). On one hand assumptions found
support in the results, as the innovator’s effect on the velocity of diffusion was two
times higher than the one of the follower (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 9). On the other hand
follower hubs have a seven times higher impact on market size than innovator hubs
(ibid.). This special role of the follower hubs marks an important difference between the
rather technical interpretation of social hubs and the psychological interpretation of
opinion leaders and market mavens. Market mavens and opinion leaders as shown in
chapters 3.1 and 3.2 allow flow of information mostly between people of similar so-
ciometrics, whereas Goldenberg et.Al. mention that follower hubs’ character is different
from the one of the innovator hubs and closer to the one of the average population. Thus
vertical flow aside from similar sociometrics is possible. This situation allows an in-
crease of market size (Goldenberg et. Al. 2009, pp. 4) and thus follower hubs will pro-
vide diffusion into mass market (ibid., pp. 9).
4. Discussion 16

4. Discussion

Getting back to the original question if there is a trait of being influential that can be
allocated to each of the concepts of personalised influence, „who one is“ (Katz 1957,
pp. 63) will be allocated to the concept of mavenism, „what one knows“ (ibid.) will go
with leadership and social hub activity will remain with „whom one knows“ (ibid.).

All these allocations have eligibility in parts of their justification. The broad (Feick and
Price 1987, pp. 85) and rapidly acquired (Levy 1978, pp. 406) knowledge of the market
maven combined with the urge to publish his opinion (Sieber 1974, pp. 575) suggests
that mavens must have a special capability to convince their peers even about rumour.
The narrowly focussed knowledge of opinion leaders (Feick and Price 1987, pp. 84)
makes it possible to acquire a time margin compared to their peers, but as it needs time
to involve once self deeply with a certain topic, there will be no time margin achievable
compared to mavens. Thus opinion leaders will have to convince by knowledge. Yet
Katz (1957, pp. 69) does mention that leaders convince, but does not clearly mention
that it happens only because of knowledge. Furthermore even the whole concept of
mavenism lacks a clear definition, as a second try to prove the MMS failed (Goodey
and East 2008, pp. 272). Additionally Goodey and East found out that no overall con-
cept of mavenism could be identified beyond reasonable doubt (ibid.).

Social Hubs seem to be the only concept that can be allocated to the latter component of
influentialism, that is namely „[…] whom one knows […]“ (Katz 1957, pp. 63). The
properties of hubs are clearly mentioned in terms of location within the web, linkage to
peers and the earlier exposure. A central location is needed from which as many ties as
possible can be served (Goldenberg et.Al. 2009, pp. 3). This is, reviewing the con-
straints, no other definition than the p-hub median problem that is used to find hubs for
hub and spoke systems in logistics (Campbell 1996, pp. 933; Mayer 2001, pp. 77)
Similar to hub and spoke systems that are built up to reduce costs, thus improving the
efficiency of distribution networks (Rodrigue et.Al. 2001, pp. 4) social hubs also en-
hance the efficiency of information diffusion by either increasing velocity (innovator
hubs) or market size (follower hubs) (Goldenberg 2009, pp. 9). The problem that re-
mains is the following: Being a social hub only is only one constraint to be fulfilled.
4. Discussion 17

Convincing others and knowing a lot are also needed to be mentioned among the influ-
entials.

Further comparing the disadvantages of hub and spoke systems in logistics to the ones
of diffusion networks, which is namely the increase in transportation time and the re-
straint to make detours (Bernsmann et.Al. 2007, pp. 9) may help to explain the multi
step flow of communication introduced by Watts and Dodds (2007). Being positively
mentioned by Goldenberg et.Al. (2009, pp. 3) that hubs provide connection back-ups if
the direct link is broken, implies on the other hand that a detour has to be made. Com-
bined with the fact that the classical two step flow lacks a feedback channel (Lazarsfeld
et.Al. 1948, pp. 151), and does not accommodate the increasing participation of the
former receivers that are more and more accorded the role of being influential in social
networks and on social news sites, the multi step flow gets closer to recent situations.
Adding futher the constraint mentioned by Watts and Dodds (2007, pp. 444) that diffu-
sion needs mostly easily influenceable people, contagion in the multi step flow comes
rather close to the way the diffusion of the dengue fever is propelled. The dengue fever
can be acquired by being bit by gnats or person-to-person airborne infection (n.A. 2005,
pp. 2). According to Ferreira (2005, pp. 8) the diffusion rate highly depends on sur-
roundings that are determined by the connectivity of the city and the domestic migration
in Brazil.
Bibliography I

Bibliography

Arndt, Johan (1967): Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New

Product, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 4, No. 3 (August), pp. 291-295.

Bass, Frank M. (2004): Comments on ‚A New Product Growth of Model Consumer

Durables’, in: Management Science, Vol. 50, No. 12 Supplement (December), pp.

Bernsmann, Arnd; Buchholz, Peter; Heinrichmeyer, Hilmar; Jehle, Egon; Kessler,

Stephan; Mehcic-Eberhardt, Sana; Müller, Dennis; von Haaren, Britta; Reinholz, An-
dreas. (2007): Modellierung großer Netzwerke in der Logistik: Bewertungs- und Di-
mensionierungsmethoden im Sonderforschungsbereich 559, in: Universität Dortmund,
http://eldorado.tu-
dortmund.de:8080/bitstream/2003/24364/1/Technical%20Report%2007002.pdf (State:
21.04.2010).

Campbell, James F. (1996): Hub Location and the p-Hub Median Problem, in: Opera-
tions Research, Vol. 44, No. 6 (November/December), pp. 923-935

Clark, Ronald A.; Goldsmith, Ronald E.; Goldsmith Elizabeth B. (2008): Market
Mavens and consumer self-confidence, in: Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, and
No. N/A (May/June) pp. 239-248

Elliot, Michael T.; Warfield, Anne E. (1993): Do Market Mavens Categorize Brands
Differently Advances? in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, No. 1 (n/a), pp. 202-208

Flick, Lawrence F.; Price, Linda L. (1987): The Market Maven A Diffuser of Market-
place Information, in Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, No. 1 (January), pp. 83- 97

Ferreira, Marcos. 2005. Spatial Diffusion of Dengue Fever Epidemics Occurring in

South-eastern Brazil: A Methodology for Cartographic Modelling in GIS, in: Geo-
sciences Institute of University of Caminos, Sao Paolo, Brazil, and
http://www.cartesia.es/geodoc/icc2005/pdf/poster/TEMA26/MARCOS%20FERREIRA
.pdf (State: 23.04.2010).

Grislier, Gary L.; Edison Steve W. (2005): Market Maven’s Attitudes towards General
Technology: Implications for Marketing Communications, in: Journal of Marketing
Communications, Vol. 11, No. 2 (June), pp. 73-94

Goldenberg, Jacob; Han, Sandman; Lehman, Donald R.; Hong, Jade Wong (2009): The
Role of Hubs in the Adoption Process, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73, No. 2
(March), pp. 1-13

Goody, Caroline; East, Robert. (2008): Testing the market maven concept, in: Journal
of Marketing Management, Vol. 24, and No. 3-4 (N/A), pp. 265-282.

Katz, Elcho (1957): The Two-Step Flow of Communication, in: The Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 1 (spring), pp. 61-78
Bibliography II

Keller, Ed; Berry, Jon (2003): The Influential – One American in Ten Tells the Other
Nine How to Vote, Where o Eat, and What to Buy, in: Concentrated Knowledge for the
Busy Executive. Vol. 25, No. 5 (May), pp. 1-8

Lazarsfeld, Paul F.; Berelson, Bernard; Gaudet, Hazel (1948): The people’s choice:
How the Voter Makes Up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign, 2. Edition, New York
NY: Columbia University Press.

Levy, Mark R. (1978): Opinion Leadership and Television News Uses , in: The Public
Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn), pp. 402-406

Mayer, Gabriela (2001): Strategische Planung von Hub-&-Spoke-Systemen. 1. Auflage

Wiesbaden: Gabler Edition – Deutscher Universitäts Verlag.

o.V. 2005. Dengue Fieber, in: Labor Spiez www.labor-

spiez.ch/de/dok/fa/pdf/dengue_fieber_d.pdf (State: 23.04.2010)

Richmond, Virginia P. (1977): The Relationship Between Opinion Leadership and In-
formation Acquisition, in: Human Communication Research, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Fall), pp.
38-43

Roch, Christine H. (2005): The Dual Roots of Opinion Leadership, in: The Journal of
Politics, Vol. 67 No. 1 (February), pp. 110-131

Rodrigue, Jean-Paul; Slack, Brian; Comtois, Claude (2001): The Handbook of Logistics
and Supply Chain Management, 2. Edition, London: Pergamon/Elsevier

Sieber, Sam D. (1974): Toward a Theory of Role Accumulation, in: American Socio-
logical Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (August), pp. 567-578

Watts, Duncan J.; Dodds, Peter Sheridan (2007): Influentials, Networks, and Public
Opinion Formation, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34, No. 4 (December), pp.
441-458
Appendix I

Appendix
Appendix I II

Appendix I:
Descriptions of the big five personality domains of Market Mavens

Source: Goodey and East 2008, p. 268

Appendix II III

Appendix II:

Ealy Theory Differences Between Early Purchaser, Opinion Leader, Market

Maven & Social Hub

Source: Compiled by the author 2010

 IV
Appendix III

Appendix III:

a) Multi Step Flow of Communication

Source: Watts and Dodds 2007, p. 444

b) Diffusion of dengue fever in Brazil

Source: Ferreira 2005, p. 6

Ehrenwörtliche Erklärung

Ich erkläre hiermit ehrenwörtlich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbständig
angefertigt habe. Die aus fremden Quellen direkt oder indirekt übernommenen
Aussagen sind als solche kenntlich gemacht.

Die Arbeit wurde bisher keiner anderen Prüfungsbehörde vorgelegt und auch noch nicht
veröffentlicht.

Mainz, 29.04.2010

_______________________
Philipp J. Reis

Absichtliche Fehlaussagen werden als Plagiat gewertet und können strafrechtliche

Konsequenzen haben.