1. MARISSA KING YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT Networks and the Diffusion of Pro-Social Innovations

2. Classic S-Shaped Diffusion Curve Rogers. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations Time Percent Adopted

3. Refrigerator Cellular Phone Air conditioner Home PC Sources: PC, refrigerator, & cell phone: Lilien 1999; Air conditioner Sulltan 1990;

5. Framework for Thinking About Endogenous Diffusion Structure  Underlying network Product  Simple Contagion  Complex Contagion- Roger’s Five Factors Mechanisms  Learning  Possession Context  Physical and Social Environment

6. S ame Framework Different Products and Contexts Antislavery organizations  King, Marissa and Heather Haveman. 2008. “Antislavery in America: The Press, the Post, and the Pulpit, 1790- 1840.” Administrative Science Quarterly 53:492-528 Cooperatives in the early 1900s  Schneiberg, Marc, Marissa King and Thomas Smith. 2008. “Social Movements and Organizational Forms: Agrarian Protest and Cooperative Alternatives to Corporate Hierarchies in Three American Industries.” American Sociological Review 73:635-667. Autism  King, Marissa and Peter Bearman. 2011. “Socioeconomic Status and the Increased Prevalence of Autism in California. American Sociological Review. 76:320-346.  Liu, Kayuet, Marissa King, and Peter Bearman. 2010. “Social Influence and the Increased Prevalence of Autism Diagnosis.” American Journal of Sociology. 115: 1387-1434. Antidepressants, stimulants, & antipsychotics  King, Marissa, Joseph Ross, Connor Essick, and Peter Bearman. Forthcoming.“Physician Conflicts of Interest and Psychotropic Prescribing.” BMJ  King, Marissa and Peter Beaman. Conflict of Interest Policies and the Diffusion of Stimulant, Antidepressant, and Antipsychotic Medications. *Sanitation facilities, fuel efficient cook stoves, and solar lanterns in India *

7. Roadmap Overview of framework  Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context 2 Cases  Potty Project-Sanitation facilities in Bhubansewar  SEWA Hariyali Project-200,000 Fuel efficient cook stoves and solar lanterns Breakout Conclusion and experimental design

8. Social network analysis: Both a theory and a method Is motivated by a structural intuition based on ties linking actors Social world as patterns or regularities among interacting units Focuses on how patterns shape behaviors Is grounded in systematic empirical data Draws heavily on graphic imagery Relies on the use of mathematical and/or computational models. Structure Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context

9. Structure: Why do Networks Matter? Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context

10. Bearman, Moody, and Stovel 2001 Structure: Why do Networks Matter? Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context

11. Structural meaning (population level) Strong ties produce triadic closure Weak ties connect often connect distinct network clusters Small worlds Relational meaning (dyadic) Weak ties are acquaintances who you interact with less frequently Weak ties connect otherwise socially distant actors Betweeness centrality Strong ties are close friends, family, etc. who you likely have an affective bond with and trust Degree centrality Structure: Strong and Weak Ties Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context Different types of ties have very different implications in diffusion processes

12. Centrality example: Colorado Springs Node size proportional to betweenness centrality Graph is 27% centralized Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context Rothenberg et al 1995 Centrality example: Add Health Node size proportional to betweenness centrality Graph is 45% centralized Bearman, Moody, and Stovel 2001

13. Random seeding vs. Influentials Influentials- Some individuals have a disproportionate number of ties  Social networks tend to be scale-free and have long right tail  Targeting influentials best way to encourage diffusion Random Seeding  Identifying influentials is next to impossible so better off saving the money/resources you would allocate to them and randomly seed  Single exposure/endorsement from one individual not as powerful as multiple exposures from several individuals Slide from Paul Adams “The Real Life Social Network”

14. S IMPLE C ONTAGION Standard epidemiological models Examples include spread of easily transmittable information or disease that spread through simple contact Mass marketing and broadcast diffusion Weak ties C OMPLEX C ONTAGION Behaviors are costly, risky, or controversial, the willingness to participate may require independent affirmation or reinforcement from multiple sources Successful transmission depends on contact with multiple carriers/advocates Social influence and peer effects But Product Characteristics (What’s Diffusing) Also Matters…. Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context Complex Contagion Requires Social Influence/Peer Effects Centola and Macy 2007

15. Product Characteristics: Roger’s Five Factors FactorDefinition Relative Advantage How improved an innovation is over the previous generation. Compatibility The level of compatibility that an innovation has to be assimilated into an individual’s life. Complexity If the innovation is perceived as complicated or difficult to use, an individual is unlikely to adopt it. Trialability How easily an innovation may be experimented. If a user is able to test an innovation, the individual will be more likely to adopt it. Observability The extent that an innovation is visible to others. An innovation that is more visible will drive communication among the individual’s peers and personal networks and will in turn create more positive or negative reactions. Structure  Product  Mechanisms  ContextRogers 1995

16. Mechanisms Selection that produces correlated choices must be ruled out Social learning  Learning by using  Reduced uncertainty since peer’s consumption Possession  Keeping up with the Jones  Joint consumption Structure  Product  Mechanisms  Context

17. Context If you introduce the same innovation on similar networks in different contexts do you see different patterns of diffusion? King and Bearman (2011) and King and Bearman (2013) both found spatial differences in patterns of diffusion Socioeconomic status Regulatory environments But very few studies examine the diffusion of the same product in different markets

18. Framework for Thinking About Diffusion Structure  Underlying network Product  Simple Contagion  Complex Contagion- Roger’s Five Factors Mechanisms  Learning  Possession Context  Physical and Social Environment

19. Case Studies SEWA Cook Stoves & Lanterns with Rodrigo Canales & Tony Sheldon Potty Project PIs: Sharon Barnhardt, Judy Chevalier, & Mushfiq Mobarak. With Rodrigo Canales

20. SEWA: Organization Overview Mission: organizing women workers for full employment and self-reliance Registered as a trade union since 1972 Membership of 1,356,000 women across 7 states in India SEWA is a cooperative of low-income, self-employed women 20 Slide from Yale GSE SEWA Micro Team

21. SEWA Hariyali Project Problems:  Women and young children spend up to five hours a day in smoky kitchens  Lung and eye health problems are common  Women spend hours collecting fuel (wood) for the stoves,.  Use of firewood contributes to deforestation. Goal:  Sell 200,000 cook stoves over three years to clients in 4 states clients in 4 states (Gujarat, Rajasthan, UP and Bihar)  Bundled with solar lantern  Cook stoves reduce wood requirements and cooktime by ~50%

22. Obstacles to Adoption The targeted Hariyali demographic is highly price sensitive Rs. 310 per month for 12 months Significant behavior change required to switch from free to paid product Health concerns are not sufficiently motivating factor

23. Existing Network By virtue of SEWA membership already have shared common identity Members of each trade elect own representatives to Considerable geographic variation in size RajasthanBiharUPGujarat Bikaner 5,035 Bareli 40260.8% Rural Dungarpur 3,300 Lucknow 24,10039.2% Urban Jaipur 550 Ajmer 100 Jodhpur 183 9, 16812,000024, 502519,309

24. Current Sales & Reporting Method Salesperson visit village and does demonstration, members raise of hands to signal interest (V, M, O) AnandBodeliSurendranagarMahesana V MOS%VMOS%VMOS%VMOS% 12 42547411.0510237903.793128100.7871401007.14 15 455532211.6482280007169955.3281821106.04 13 293542418.411353300.849197331.526141704.96 20 440221356154201.295149523.3547117023.94 12 25025141018561100.17491222.197127836.29 13 25013115.2924800000000101731709.82 14 26020117.693640000000013204232211.27 17 44043369.7718515100.19000002041516 3.85

25. Network Potential SEWA already has existing network and information about network members Relatively variability in village size Variability in connectedness between villages Product characteristics make cook stoves and lanterns good candidates for diffusion  Visibility and trialability

26. Potty Project Diffusion Analysis and Policy Evaluation with Rodrigo Canales

27. Problem 45% of households use either public or communal toilets in the slums of Bhubaneswar and Cuttack 53% of these toilets are either “dirty” or “very dirty’ & one was completely non-functional Households dissatisfied with the cleanliness were the most likely to practice open defecation  30% of households reported doing so Barnhardt, Chevalier & Mobarak

28. Potty Project Gates Foundation commissioned Quicksand Design Studio to conduct in-depth research into the behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs surrounding sanitation in low- income urban India in 10 slums in 5 cities in India. Photos: Quicksand reprinted in Wall Street Journal

29. Potty Project Based on their research they designed new sanitation facility prototype Design: Quicksand reprinted in Wall Street Journal

30. Potty Project Barnhardt, Chevalier & Mobarak are utilizing Quicksand’s insights in a field experiment Paid ManagerCooperative Management Improved Facilities Basic New Facilities Basic Improved Facilities Enhanced New Facilities Enhanced Basic facilities include adequate gender-separate toilets and washbasins, sufficient lighting and ventilation & enough water for all services Improved facilities will include bathing, child toilets, menstruation waste Experiment will also include discount coupons and varying pricing structure (monthly passes vs. pay-per-use)

31. Why Networks Matter Quicksand pottyproject.in

32. Network Context Lots of social cleavages Existing networks critical for both initiating use and creating community ownership to encourage sustainability Old facilities have existing network of users, new facilities do not Network data from household survey

33. Study Design

34. SEWA Context: How much does the importance of social influence vary by area and population ? Product: Give loaner cook stoves to seed network Structure and Mechanisms(?) Sales Pitch from Alter No Sales Pitch from Alter Random Seed Influentials No Network SeedingSales pitch from outsider

35. Potty Project Context: How much does the importance of social influence vary by area, toilet design, and composition of population ? Product: Use vouchers for facility (much like drug companies) Structure and Mechanisms(?) Sales Pitch from Alter No Sales Pitch from Alter Random Seed Influentials No Network SeedingSales pitch from outsider

36. Hariyali & Potty Project Additional research opportunities: Product abandonment How do networks change after introduction of new technology? Both projects will include extensive fieldwork and project evaluations

37. Thanks!