Toward a model of meme diffusion (M3D)

Communication Theory

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 311-339

  Spitzberg, Brian H ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; EVOLUTIONARY THEORY; HEURISTICS; INNOVATION; SOCIAL NETWORK; SOCIAL THEORY;

EID: 84904335986     PISSN: 10503293     EISSN: 14682885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/comt.12042     Document Type: Article

References (174)

1. Adams, P. C., & Jansson, A. (2012). Communication geography: A bridge between disciplines. Communication Theory, 22, 299-318. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01406.x
2. Allen, M., & Preiss, R. W. (1997). Comparing the persuasiveness of narrative and statistical evidence using meta-analysis. Communication Research Reports, 14, 125-131. doi: 10.1080/08824099709388654
3. Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., Bosch, H., Ertl, T., Fuchs, G., Jankowski, P., & Thom, D. (2013). Thematic patterns in georeferenced tweets through space-time visual analytics. Computing in Science and Engineering, 15(3), 72-82. doi:10.1109/MCSE.2013.70
4. Assenza, S., Gutiérrez, R., Gómez-Gardeñes, J., Latora, V., & Boccaletti, S. (2011). Emergence of structural patterns out of synchronization in networks with competitive interactions. Scientific Reports, 1(99), 1-8. doi:10.1038/srep00099
5. Aunger, R. (2002). The electric meme: A new theory of how we think. New York: Free Press.
6. Baden, C., & Lecheler, S. (2012). Fleeting, fading, or far-reaching? A knowledge-based model of the persistence of framing effects. Communication Theory, 22, 359-382. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01413.x
7. Baesler, E. (1995). Construction and test of an empirical measure for narrative coherence and fidelity. Communication Reports, 8(2), 97-101. doi: 10.1080/08934219509367615
8. Banas, J. A., & Rains, S. A. (2010). A meta-analysis of research on inoculation theory. Communication Monographs, 77, 281-311. doi:10.1080/03637751003758193
9. Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2008). Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1493-1512. doi:10.1002/asi.20857
10. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
11. Bauckhage, C. (2011, July). Insights into internet memes. Proceedings of the fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/schedConf/presentations
12. von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York, NY: George Braziller.
13. von Bertalanffy, L. (1975). Perspectives on general systems theory. New York, NY: George Braziller.
14. Besel, R. D. (2011). Opening the 'black box' of climate change science: Actor-network theory and rhetorical practice in scientific controversies. Southern Communication Journal, 76, 120-136. doi:10.1080/10417941003642403
15. Betts, K. R., & Hinsz, V. B. (2013). Group marginalization: Extending research on interpersonal rejection to small groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 355-370. doi:10.1177/1088868313497999
16. Bisgin, H., Agarwal, N., & Xu, X. (2012). A study of homophily on social media. World Wide Web, 15, 213-232. doi:10.1007/s11280-011-0143-3
17. Blackmore, S. (1999). The meme machine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18. Brandtzæg, P. B. (2010). Towards a unified media-user typology (MUT): A meta-analysis and review of the research literature on media-user typologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 940-956. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.008
19. Brodie, R. (1996). Virus of the mind: The new science of the meme. Carlsbad, CA: Hay House.
20. Buck, R. (2011). Communicative genes in the evolution of empathy and altruism. Behavioral Genetics, 41, 876-888. doi:10.1007/s10519-011-9456-3
21. Cairncross, F. (1997). The death of distance: How the communications revolution is changing our lives. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
22. Castells, M. (2011). A network theory of power. International Journal of Communication, 5, 773-787.
23. Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network. Science, 329, 1194-1197. doi:10.1126/science.1185231
24. Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, K. P. (2010, May). Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. ICWSM 10 Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Conference on Weblogs and Social Media George Washington University, Washington, DC. Available from http://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-readings/cha10influence.pdf
25. Chen, H., Reid, E., Sinai, J., Silke, A., & Ganor, B. (Eds.) (2008). Terrorism informatics: Knowledge management and data mining for homeland security. New York, NY: Springer.
26. Chen, J., Shaw, S.-L., Yu, H., Lu, F., Chai, Y., & Jia, Q. (2011). Exploratory data analysis of activity diary data: A space-time GIS approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 19, 394-404. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.11.002
27. Chielens, K., & Heylighen, F. (2005). Operationalization of meme selection criteria: Methodologies to empirically test memetic predictions. In Proceedings of the joint symposium on socially inspired computing (AISB): Society for the study of artificial intelligence and the simulation of behaviour (pp. 14-20). Hatfield, England: University of Hertfordshire.
28. Chiu, H.-C., Hsieh, Y.-C., Kao, Y.-H., & Lee, M. (2007). The determinants of email receivers' disseminating behaviors on the internet. Journal of Advertising Research, 47, 524-534. doi:10.2501/S0021849907070547
29. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
30. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007a). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99-118. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.00331.x
31. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007b). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054
32. Comfort, L. K. (2010, December). Social network interaction among nested sets in dynamic contexts: Disaster operations as a laboratory for social change. Paper presented at the Spatio-Temporal Constraints on Social Networks Specialist Meeting, University of California, Santa Barbara. Retrieved from http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/projects/spatio-temporal/docs/Comfort-position.pdf
33. Compeau, D. R., Meisher, D. B., & Higgins, C. A. (2007). From prediction to explanation: Reconceptualizing and extending the perceived characteristics of innovating. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8, 409-439.
34. Cornelissen, J. P. (2013). Making sense of theory construction: Metaphor and disciplined imagination. Organization Studies, 27, 1579-1597. doi:10.1177/0170840606068333
35. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2013). Conceptualizing mediatization. Communication Theory, 23, 191-203. doi:10.1111/comt.12019
36. Crandall, D., Backstrom, L., Cosley, D., Suri, S., Huttenlocher, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Inferring social ties from geographic coincidences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(52), 22436-22441. doi:10.1073/pnas.1006155107
37. Cruz, D., & Fill, C. (2008). Evaluating viral marketing: Isolating the key criteria. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26, 743-758. doi:10.1108/02634500810916690
38. David, C. C., Atun, J. M., Fille, E., & Monterola, C. (2011). Finding frames: Comparing two methods of frame analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 5, 329-351. doi:10.1080/19312458.2011.624873
39. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
40. De Bruyn, A., & Lilien, G. L. (2008). A multi-stage model of word-of-mouth influence through viral marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25, 151-163. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.03.004
41. Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007). The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: A meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research. Journal of Communication, 57, 613-631. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00360.x
42. Dobele, A., Lindgreen, A., Beverland, M., Vanhamme, J., & van Wijk, R. (2007). Why pass on viral messages? Because they connect emotionally. Business Horizons, 50, 291-304. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2007.01.004
43. Dodds, P. S., Muhamad, R., & Watts, D. J. (2003). An experimental study of search in global social networks. Science, 301, 827-829. doi: 10.1126/science.1081058
44. Dodge, K. A. (2008). Framing public policy and prevention of chronic violence in American youths. American Psychologist, 63, 573-590. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.573
45. Donath, J. (2008). Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 231-251. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00394.x
46. Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256. doi:10.1023/A:1015006907312
47. Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication, 61, 659-688. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01562.x
48. Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2008). The targets of online protest: State and private targets of four online protest tactics. Information, Communication & Society, 11, 449-472. doi:10.1080/13691180801999035
49. Fisher, W. R. (1984). Narration as human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51, 1-22.
50. Fisher, W. R. (1985). The narrative paradigm: An elaboration. Communication Monographs, 52(4), 347. doi:10.1080/03637758509376117
51. Fisher, W. R. (1989). Clarifying the narrative paradigm. Communication Monographs, 56, 55-58. doi:10.1080/03637758909390249
52. Fisher, W. R. (1994). Narrative rationality and the logic of scientific discourse. Argumentation, 8, 21-31. doi:10.1007/BF00710701
53. Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2010). Cooperative behavior cascades in human networks. PNAS, 107, 5334-5338. doi:10.1073/pnas.0913149107
54. Friedman, D., & Singh, N. (2004). Negative reciprocity: The coevolution of memes and genes. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(3), 155-173. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.03.002
55. Fu, F., Nowak, M. A., Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). The evolution of homophily. Scientific Reports, 2(845), 1-6. doi:10.1038/srep00845
56. Gallagher, K. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Health message framing effects on attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A meta-analytic review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 43, 101-116. doi:10.1007/s12160-011-9308-7
57. Garg, R., Smit, M. D., & Telang, R. (2011). Measuring information diffusion in an online activity. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28, 11-37. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222280202
58. Gazzard, A. (2011). Location, location, location: Collecting space and place in mobile media. Convergence, 17, 405-417. doi: 10.1177/1354856511414344
59. Glasman, L. R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 778-822. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.778
60. Glynn, C. J., Hayes, A. F., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Perceived support for one's opinions and willingness to speak out: A meta-analysis of survey studies on the "spiral of silence." Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 452-463. doi:10.1086/297808
61. Godes, D., & Mayzlin, D. (2004). Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Science, 23, 545-560. doi:10.1287/mksc.1040.0071
62. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63. Goldsmith, J. (2001). On information theory, entropy, and phonology in the 20th century. Folia Linguistica, 34(1-2), 85-100.
64. González, M., Hidalgo, C., & Barabási, A. (2008). Understanding individual human mobility patterns. Nature, 453(7196), 779-782. doi:10.1038/nature06958
65. González-Bailón, S., Banchs, R. E., & Kaltenbrunner, A. (2012). Emotions, public opinion, and U.S. presidential approval rates: A 5-year analysis of online political discussions. Human Communication Research, 38, 121-143. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01423.x
66. Gupta, D. K. (2001). Path to collective madness: A study in social order and political pathology. Westport, CT: Praeger.
67. Hahner, L. A. (2013). The riot kiss: Framing memes as visual argument. Argumentation and Advocacy, 49, 151-166.
68. Hampton, K. N., & Ling, R. (2013). Explaining communication displacement and large-scale social change in core networks. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 561-589. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.777760
69. Hanaki, N., Peterhansl, A., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2007). Cooperation in evolving social networks. Management Science, 53, 1036-1050. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0625
70. Harvey, C. G., Stewart, D. B., & Ewing, M. T. (2011). Forward or delete: What drives peer-to-peer message propagation across social networks? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10, 365-372. doi:10.1002/cb.383
71. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2008). Five misunderstandings about cultural evolution. Human Nature, 19, 119-137. doi:10.1007/s12110-008-9037-1
72. Heylighen, F. (1993). Selection criteria for the evolution of knowledge. Proceedings of the 13th international congress on cybernetics (pp. 524-528). International Congress on Cybernetics, Namur, Belgium. Retrieved from http://pcp.vub.ac.be/papers/SelCriteriaKnow.pdf
73. Heylighen, F. (1998, August). What makes a meme successful? Selection criteria for cultural evolution. Symposium on memetics: Evolutionary models of information transmission, 15th International Congress on Cybernetics, Namur, Belgium. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/1132/1/MemeticsNamur.html
74. Heylighen, F., & Chielens, K. (2009). Cultural evolution and memetics. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of complexity and system science (pp. 3205-3220). New York, NY: Springer.
75. Ho, J. Y. C., & Dempsey, M. (2010). Viral marketing: Motivations to forward online content. Journal of Business Research, 63, 1000-1006. doi:10.1016/j.bjbusres.2008.08.010
76. Hoeken, H., Swanepoel, P., Saal, E., & Jansen, C. (2009). Using message form to stimulate conversations: The case of tropes. Communication Theory, 19, 49-65. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01332.x
77. Hong Nga Nguyen, V., & Gehrau, V. (2010). Agenda diffusion: An integrated model of agenda setting and interpersonal communication. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 87, 100-116.
78. Iribarren, J. L., & Moro, E. (2011). Affinity paths and information diffusion in social networks. Social Networks, 33, 134-142. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2010.11.003
79. Ishii, K. (2006). Implications of mobility: The uses of personal communication media in everyday life. Journal of Communication, 56, 346-365. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00023.x
80. Jenkins-Guarnieri, M. A., Wright, S. L., & Johnson, B. D. (2013). The interrelationships among attachment style, personality traits, interpersonal competency, and Facebook use. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2, 117-131. doi:10.1037/a0030946
81. Johnson, D. (2007). Mapping the meme: A geographical approach to materialist rhetorical criticism. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 4, 27-50. doi:10.1080/14791420601138286
82. José-Cabezudo, R. S., & Camarero-Izquierdo, C. (2012). Determinants of opening-forwarding e-mail messages. Journal of Advertising, 41, 97-112. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367410207
83. Kee, K. F., Sparks, L., Struppa, D. C., & Mannucci, M. (2013). Social groups, social media and higher dimensional social structures: Towards a simplicial model of social aggregation for computational communication research. Communication Quarterly, 61, 35-58. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.719566
84. Kilpinen, E. (2008). Memes versus signs: On the use of meaning concepts about nature and culture. Semiotica, 171, 215-237. doi:10.1515/SEMI.2008.075
85. Kleinnijenhuis, J., van den Hooff, B., Utz, S., Vermeulen, I., & Huysman, M. (2011). Social influence in networks of practice: An analysis of organizational communication content. Communication Research, 38, 587-612. doi:10.1177/0093650210385225
86. Kock, N. (2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science, 15, 327-348. doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0071
87. Kock, N. (2009). Information systems theorizing based on evolutionary psychology: An interdisciplinary review and theory integration framework. MIS Quarterly, 33, 395-418.
88. Kossinets, G., & Watts, D. J. (2009). Origins of homophily in an evolving social network. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 405-450. doi:10.1086/599247
89. Ku, Y.-C., Chu, T.-H., & Tseng, G.-H. (2013). Gratifications for using CMC technologies: A comparison among SNS, IM, and e-mail. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 226-234. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.009
90. Kurzman, C. (2004). Can understanding undermine explanation? The confused experience of revolution. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34, 328-351. doi:10.1177/0048393104266687
91. Kwan, M.-P. (2006). Geospatial ontology development and semantic analytics. Transactions in GIS, 10, 551-575. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9671.2006.01012.x
92. Lakoff, G. (2004). Don't think of an elephant. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.
93. Lakoff, G. (2010). Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication, 4, 70-81. doi:10.1080/17524030903529749
94. LaRose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 358-377.
95. Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabási, A.-L., Brewer, D., ... Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Computational social science. Science, 323, 721-723. doi:10.1126/science.1167742
96. Lee, J., Lee, J.-H., & Lee, D. (2009). Impacts of tie characteristics on online viral diffusion. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24, 545-556.
97. Leiner, D. J., & Quiring, O. (2008). What interactivity means to the user essential insights into and a scale for perceived interactivity. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 127-155. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01434.x
98. Leskovec, J., Backstrom, L., & Kleinberg, J. (2009). Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle. In Proceedings of the KDD of the 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 497-506). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
99. Li, W. (1992). Random texts exhibit Zipf's-law-like word frequency distribution. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 38, 1842-1845. doi:10.1109/18.165464
100. Liben-Nowell, D., Novak, J., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., & Tomkins, A. (2005). Geographic routing in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(33), 11623-11628. doi:10.1073/pnas.0503018102
101. Liu-Thompkins, Y. (2012). Seeding viral content: The role of message and network factors. Journal of Advertising Research, 52, 465-478. doi: 10.2501/JAR-52-4-465-478
102. Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Rogerson, M. (2012). Rising to stardom: An empirical investigation of the diffusion of user-generated content. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26, 71-82. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2011.11.003
103. Lynch, A. (1996). Thought contagion. How belief spreads through society. The new science of memes. New York, NY: Basic Books.
104. Macskassy, S. A., & Michelson, M. (2011, July). Why do people retweet? Anti-homophily wins the day! Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/2975090/Why_do_People_Retweet_Anti-Homophily_Wins_the_Day
105. Manusov, V., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2008). Attributes of attribution theory: Finding good cause in the search for theory. In D. Braithwaite & L. A. Baxter (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication (pp. 37-50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
106. Matthes, J., Morrison, K., & Schemer, C. (2010). A spiral of silence for some: Attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Communication Research, 37, 774-800. doi:10.1177/0093650210362685
107. Mok, D., Wellman, B., & Carrasco, J. (2010). Does distance matter in the age of the internet? Urban Studies, 47, 2747-2783. doi: 10.1177/0042098010377363
108. Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (1999). The structure and function of collective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theory development. Academy of Management Review, 24, 249-265. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.1893935
109. Nagel, A. C., Tsou, M.-H., Spitzberg, B. H., An, L., Gawron, J. M., Gupta, D. K., ... Sawyer, M. H. (2013). The complex relationship of real-space events and messages in cyberspace: A case study of influenza and pertussis using tweets. Journal of Internet Medical Research, 15(10), e237. doi:10.2196/jmir.2705
110. Nettle, D. (2002). The elusive science of the meme. Current Anthropology, 43(2), 344-347.
111. O'Keefe, D. J. (1999). How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: A meta-analytic review of one-sided and two-sided messages. Communication Yearbook, 22, 209-250.
112. O'Keefe, D., & Nan, X. (2012). The relative persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages for promoting vaccination: A meta-analytic review. Health Communication, 27(8), 776-783. doi:10.1080/10410236.2011.640974
113. Onnela, J., Arbesman, S., González, M. C., Barabási, A., & Christakis, N. A. (2011). Geographic constraints on social network groups. Plos ONE, 6(4), 1-7. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016939
114. Papacharissi, Z. (2009). The virtual geographies of social networks: A comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and ASmallWorld. New Media and Society, 11, 199-220. doi:10.1177/1461444808099577
115. Paull, J. (2009). Meme maps: A tool for configuring memes in time and space. European Journal of Scientific Research, 31, 11-18.
116. Ramirez, A., Jr., Dimmick, J., Feaster, J., & Lin, S.-F. (2008). Revisiting interpersonal media competition: The gratification niches of instant messaging, e-mail, and the telephone. Communication Research, 35, 529-547. doi:10.1177/0093650298315979
117. Ratkiewicz, J., Conover, M., Meiss, M., Gonçalves, B., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2011, July). Detecting and tracking political abuse in social media. Proceedings of the fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/paper/view/2850/3274
118. Ratkiewicz, J., Fortunato, S., Flammini, A., Menczer, F., & Vespignani, A. (2010). Characterizing and modeling the dynamics of online popularity. Physical Review Letters, 105(15), 158701. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.158701
119. Reid, S. A., Giles, H., & Abrams, J. R. (2004). A social identity model of media usage and effects. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 16, 17-25.
120. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
121. Rogers, E. M., & Kincaid, D. L. (1981). Communication networks: Toward a new paradigm for research. New York, NY: Free Press.
122. Sawyer, R. K. (2005). Social emergence: Societies as complex systems. Cambridge University Press: New York, NY.
123. Scheufele, B. T. (2004). Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique. Communications, 29, 401-428.
124. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9-20. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00326.x
125. Schudson, M. (2004). The place of sociology in the study of political communication. Political Communication, 21, 271-273. doi:10.1080/10584600490481280
126. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1964). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
127. Shaw, S.-L., Yu, H., & Bombom, L. S. (2008). A space-time GIS approach to exploring large individual-based spatiotemporal datasets. Transactions in GIS, 12, 425-441. doi:10.1111/j.1467-0671.2008.01114.x
128. Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 362-377. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12013
129. Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in digital culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
130. Shumate, M., Pilny, A., Atouba, Y., Kim, J., Peña-y-Lillo, M., Cooper, K. R., ... Yang, S. (2013). A taxonomy of communication networks. Communication Yearbook, 37, 95-124.
131. Simmons, M. P., Adamic, L. A., & Adar, E. (2011, July). Memes online: Extracted, subtracted, injected, and recollected. Proceedings of the fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM11/schedConf/presentations
132. Smith, E. (2010). Communication and collective action: Language and the evolution of human cooperation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 231-245. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.03.001
133. Snow, D. A. (2004). Framing processes, ideology, and discursive fields. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 380-412). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
134. Song, I., Larose, R., Eastin, M. S., & Lin, C. A. (2004). Internet gratifications and internet addiction: On the uses and abuses of new media. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7, 384-394. doi:10.1089/cpb.2004.7.384
135. Song, C., Qu, Z., Blumm, N., & Barabási, A.-L. (2010). Limits of predictability in human mobility. Science, 327, 1018-1021. doi:10.1126/science.1177170
136. Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). What is good communication? Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 29, 103-119.
137. Spitzberg, B. H. (2006). Toward a theory of computer-mediated communication competence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 629-666. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00030.x
138. Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal communication competence. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
139. Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (2011). Interpersonal skills. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (4th ed., pp. 481-524). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
140. Spitzberg, B. H., Tsou, M.-H., An, L., Gupta, D. K., & Gawron, J. M. (2013). The map is not which territory? Speculating on the geo-spatial diffusion of ideas in the Arab Spring of 2011. Studies in Media and Communication, 1, 101-115. doi:10.11114/smc.v1i1.64
141. Suh, B., Hong, L., Pirolli, P., & Chi, E. H. (2010). Want to be retweeted? Large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in Twitter network. SOCIALCOM '10 Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Social Computing (pp. 177-184). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. doi:10.1109/SocialCom.2010.33
142. Sultan, F., Farley, J. U., & Lehmann, D. R. (1990). A meta-analysis of applications of diffusion models. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 70-77.
143. Sultan, F., Farley, J. U., & Lehmann, D. R. (1996). Reflections on "a meta-analysis of applications of diffusion models. Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 247-249.
144. Takhteyev, Y., Gruzd, A., & Wellman, B. (2012). Geography of Twitter networks. Social Networks, 34, 73-81. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2011.05.006
145. Thompson, G. N., Estabrooks, C. A., & Degner, L. F. (2006). Clarifying the concepts in knowledge transfer: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53, 691-701. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03775.x
146. Tillema, T., Dijst, M., & Schwanen, T. (2010). Face-to-face and electronic communications in maintaining social networks: The influence of geographical and relational distance and of information content. New Media & Society, 12, 965-983. doi:10.1177/1461444809353011
147. Toole, J. L., Cha, M., & González, M. C. (2012). Modeling the adoption of innovations in the presence of geographic and media influences. PLoS One, 7(1), e29528. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029528
148. Totterdell, P., Holan, D., & Hukin, A. (2008). Social networkers: Measuring and examining individual differences in propensity to connect with others. Social Networks, 30, 283-296. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.208.04.003
149. Trier, M. (2008). Towards dynamic visualization for understanding evolution of digital communication networks. Information Systems Research, 19, 335-350.
150. Turner, J. H. (1990). The misuse and use of metatheory. Sociological Forum, 5, 37-53. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029528
151. Tyrkkö, J. (2007). Making sense of digital textuality. European Journal of English Studies, 11, 147-161. doi:10.1080/13825570701452722
152. Van den Bulte, C., & Stremersch, S. (2004). Social contagion and income heterogeneity in new product diffusion: A meta-analytic test. Marketing Science, 23, 530-544. doi:10.1287/mksc.1040.0054
153. Vishwanath, A., & Chen, H. (2011). Towards a comprehensive understanding of the innovation-decision process. In A. Vishwanath & G. A. Barnett (Eds.), The diffusion of innovations: A communication science perspective (pp. 9-32). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
154. Von Foerster, H. (1953). Cybernetics: Circular causal and feedback mechanisms in biological and social systems. New York, NY: Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation.
155. Wang, H., & Wellman, B. (2010). Social connectivity in America: Changes in adult friendship network size from 2002 to 2007. American Behavioral Scientist, 53, 1148-1169. doi:10.1177/0002764209356247
156. Watters, E. (2010, January 10). The Americanization of mental illness. New York Times Magazine. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/magazine/10psyche-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
157. Watts, D. J. (2003). Six degrees: The science of a connected age. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
158. Watts, D. J. (2004). The "new" science of networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 243-270. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.30.020404.104342
159. Watts, D. J., & Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 441-458. doi:10.1086/518527
160. Wei, X., Valler, N. C., Prakash, B. A., Neamtiu, I., Faloutsos, M., & Faloutsos, C. (2013). Competing memes propagating on networks: A network science perspective. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 31, 1049-1060. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2013.130607
161. Wellman, B., Haase, A. Q., Wit, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 436-455.
162. Weng, L., Flammini, A., Vespignani, A., & Menczer, F. (2012). Competition among memes in a world with limited attention. Scientific Reports, 2(335), 1-8. doi:10.1038/srep00335
163. Wiener, N. (1950). The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
164. Wilson, D. S., & Wilson, E. O. (2007). Rethinking the theoretical foundation of sociobiology. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82, 327-348. doi:10.1086/522809
165. Wisdom, J. P., Brian Chor, K. H., Hoagwood, K. E., & Horwitz, S. M. (2013). Innovation adoption: A review of theories and constructs. Administrative Policy and Mental Health. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0486-4
166. Wu, F., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). Novelty and collective action. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(45), 17599-17601. doi:10.1073/pnas.0704916104
167. Yang, Q., & Wu, X. (2006). 10 challenging problems in data mining research. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 5(4), 597-604.
168. Yates, F. E. (2012). On varieties of information. Ecological Psychology, 24, 185-203. doi:10.1080/10407413.2012.702615
169. Yin, L., Shaw, S.-L., & Yu, H. (2011). Potential effects of ICT on face-to-face meeting opportunities: A GIS-based time-geographic exploratory approach. Journal of Transport Geography, 19, 422-433. doi:10.1016/j.jrrangeo.2010.09.007
170. Young, H. P. (2009). Innovation diffusion in heterogeneous populations: Contagion, social influence, and social learning. American Economic Review, 99, 1899-1924. doi:10.1257/aer.99.5.1899
171. Zarefsky, D. (2008). Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation. Argumentation, 22, 317-330. doi:10.1007/s10503-008-9096-9
172. Zhao, S. (2006). Do internet users have more social ties? A call for differentiated analyses of internet use. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 844-862. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00038.x
173. Zhou, L., Ding, L., & Finin, T. (2011). How is the semantic web evolving? A dynamic social network perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1294-1302. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.024
174. TM and offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 1-34. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01429.x