Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2013).

Social contagion theory: Examining dynamic social

networks and human behavior. Statistics In Medicine, 32(4), 556–577.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5408

This article seeks to “characterize interpersonal influence with respect to phenomena as diverse
as obesity, smoking, cooperation, and happiness” (Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H.). The
authors do this by compiling several datasets obtained by various organizations on particular
phenomena and analyzing and performing computations on them. This allows them to put
together a coherent, empirical picture that links these lifestyles to how they may be
communicated (spread via “contagion”) in social relationships. Their findings claim that ideas
are communicated through up to “three degrees” of influence, degrees being their unit of
calculation they call “geodesic distance” in the social web. For example, a first degree would be
something communicated directly from person-to-person, while a third degree could be a friend-
of-a-friend-of-a-friend. This definitely reinforces the ideas of Social Contagion Theory, showing
empirically that through behavior ideas and lifestyle are inevitably going to spread.

Burgess, L.G., Riddell, P.M., Fancourt, A. and Murayama, K. (2018). The influence of social
contagion within education: A motivational perspective. Mind, Brain, and Education, 12: 164-
174. doi:10.1111/mbe.12178

In this article, the authors “highlight the importance of students' social interactions in school,
considering contagion between peers and contagion from teachers to students, using a motivation
perspective,” hoping to provide a framework for encouraging positive educational contagion
(Burgess, L.G., Riddell, P.M., Fancourt, A. and Murayama, K). They used what is called
“stochastic actor‐based modeling” to evaluate the academic setting, which allows them to
precisely pin down what influences who, where, and the results. The findings suggest that, as one
could assume in the context of the theory, social contagion plays a major part in the performance
of adolescents at school. This not only affirms the existence of social contagion, but can help
provide us a way to positively use it, as they found in students’ positive motivational effects on
eachother.

Hodas, N., Lerman, K. The simple rules of social contagion. Sci Rep 4, 4343 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04343
The purpose for this article is to highlight that social contagion is more complex than commonly
thought to be. To do this, they acknowledge the prominent use of social media in today’s society
to acquire and disseminate information between peers, and analyze such data to see how easily
people are “infected” with ideas. They found that mere exposure to an idea does not necessarily
infect someone, simply because one could be exposed to so many things they don’t act on any
one, while those that are exposed to less are more likely to be infected. This is a fascinating find
in regards to Social Contagion Theory, as it goes to show that exposure can actually be counter-
productive, and that messages must require a factor that elicits a unique response from the
exposed individual to be contagious.

Sprague DA, House T. (2017). Evidence for complex contagion models of social contagion from
observational data. PLOS ONE 12(7): e0180802. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180802

This article seeks to create and describe what the authors call their “complex contagion model,”
an empirical, mathematical method for analyzing and predicting various “fads” and phenomena
transmitted in a society. To explore this method, they tested it on the popular “ALS Ice Bucket
Challenge” trend of 2014. They found that they were able to, using this formula, accurately
predict the peak and duration of the fad. This is an important find because of its implications:
that we can use this complex contagion model to not only understand, but predict the
transmission of ideas in a society. This can have immense positive effects if used in cases such as
charities like the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge.

Tsvetkova M, Macy M.W. (2014). The social contagion of generosity. PLOS ONE 9(2): e87275.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087275

In this article, the authors seek to answer the question, “why do people help strangers when there
is a low probability that help will be directly reciprocated or socially rewarded?” (Tsvetkova M,
Macy M.W.). They hope to find this answer by using Social Contagion Theory, exploring the
idea that generous acts are “contagious.” They set up an online experiment that test “generalized
reciprocity” and “third-party influence.” They found that, when helped, someone is more likely
to reciprocate such acts of kindness. However, merely observing acts of kindness does not
necessarily increase your likelihood of performing those acts. This is another important find in
Social Contagion Theory, showing that transmission of ideas is generally a result of direct
interaction and not simple observation.