A Coupled Dynamic Model of Brand Acceptance and Promotive Information Spreading

Abstract

When people try to decide to buy or not to, they are often influenced by both their inherent opinions and the social marketing activities e.g. advertising, social news with strong point of view. Then people will make their final choice, or even convince other people to buy. After all, this is the brand acceptance formation process. Factually, the dynamics of brand acceptance is essentially an interwoven dynamics of endogenous opinion dynamics disturbed by an information diffusion process. To have a better understanding of the dynamics of brand acceptance, we propose and analyze a coupled agent-based dynamic model that combines the Majority-Rule-based Voter model in opinion dynamics with the SI Model for information spreading to analyze the dynamics of brand acceptance in social media. We focus on two important parameters in diffusion dynamics: the decayed transmission rate (β) and the diffusion frequency (f). When the system is stable, the order parameter of the system is the duration time (τ). In the absence of opinion interaction, the simulation results indicate that, when a brand tries to occupy a larger market share through social marketing approaches, it is always effective to let the opponent to be the propaganda target. While with the Majority-Rule-based Voter Model included, we observe that the opinion interaction could have a dual function, which shows that a brand holding a small market share in the first place needs to adopt diverse marketing approaches according to different marketing environment types.

Keywords

Coupled dynamics / social marketing / dynamics of brand acceptance / opinion dynamics / diffusion dynamics

References

[1] Grönlund A., Holme P.. A network–based threshold model for the spreading of fads in society and market. Advances in Complex Systems, 2005, 8: 261-273.

[2] Holley R.A., Liggett T.M.. Ergodic Theorems for Weakly Interacting Infinite Systems and the Voter Model. Annals of Probability., 1975, 3(4): 643-663.

[3] Castellano C., Vilone D., Vespignani A.. Incomplete ordering of the voter model on small–world networks. Europhysics Letters(EPL)., 2003, 63(1): 153-158.

[4] Castellano C., Fortunato S., Loreto V.. Statistical physics of social dynamics. Review of Modern Physics., 2007, 81(2): 591-646.

[5] Wang C., Tang X.. The Online Debate Networks Analysis: A Case Study of Debates at Tianya Forum. Knowledge and Systems Sciences, Proceedings of 17th International symposium on knowledge and systems sciences, 2016

[6] Castillo–Chavez C., Huang W., Li J.. Competitive Exclusion in Gonorrhea Models and Other Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Siam Journal on Applied Mathematics., 1996, 56(2): 494-508.

[7] Stauffer D.. Sociophysics simulations II: opinion dynamics, 2005

[8] Schweitzer F., Hołyst J.A.. Modelling collective opinion formation by means of active Brownian particles. The European Physical Journal B–Condensed Matter and Complex Systems., 2000, 15(4): 723-732.

[9] Lafley A.G., Charan R.. The Game–Changer: How You Can Drive Revenue and Profit Growth with Innovation. Enterprise/salt Lake City., 2008, 26(5): 97-99.

[10] Zanette D.H.. Dynamics of rumor propagation on small–world networks. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics, 2001

[11] Dornic Ie.a. Critical coarsening without surface tension: the universality class of the voter model. Physical Review Letters., 2001, 87(4): 045701.

[12] Leskovec J., Adamic L.A., Huberman B.A.. The Dynamics of Viral Marketing. Acm Transactions on the Web., 2005, 1(1): 5.

[13] Hołyst J., Kacperski K.. Social impact models of opinion dynamics, 2001.

[14] Shao J., Buldyrev S.V., Havlin S., Stanley H.E.. Cascade of failures in coupled network systems with multiple support–dependence relations. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics., 2011, 83(2): 1127-1134.

[15] Frachebourg L., Krapivsky P.L.. Exact Results for Kinetics of Catalytic Reactions. Physical Review E Statistical Physics Plasmas Fluids & Related Interdisciplinary Topics., 1995 R3009-R3012.

[16] Lewenstein M., Nowak A., Latané B.. Statistical mechanics of social impact. Physical Review A., 1992, 45(2): 763-776.

[17] Kivelä M., Arenas A., Barthelemy M., Gleeson J.P., Moreno Y., Porter M.A.. Multilayer networks. Ssrn Electronic Journal., 2013, 2(3): 261-268.

[18] Mobilia M., Redner S.. Majority versus minority dynamics: phase transition in an interacting two–state spin system. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics., 2003, 68(2): 046106.

[19] Rachaniotis N., Dasaklis T.K., Pappis C.. Controlling infectious disease outbreaks: A deterministic allocation–scheduling model with multiple discrete resources", Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering., 2017, 26(2): 219-239.

[20] Kotler P., Zaltman G.. Social marketing: an approach to planned social change. In: Inter–Governmental Coordinating Committee., 1975, 35(3): 3-12.

[21] Chen P., Redner S.. Majority rule dynamics in finite dimensions. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics, 2005

[22] Pastor–Satorras R., Vespignani A.. Epidemic dynamics and endemic states in complex networks. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics., 2001, 63(2): 066117.

[23] Lambiotte R., Saramäki J., Blondel V.D.. Dynamics of latent voters. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics, 2009

[24] Dodds P.S., Watts D.J.. A generalized model of social and biological contagion. Journal of Theoretical Biology., 2005, 232(4): 587-604.

[25] Galam S.. Real space renormalization group and totalitarian paradox of majority rule voting. Physica A Statistical Mechanics & Its Applications., 2000

[26] Galam S.. The September 11 attack: A percolation of individual passive support. The European Physical Journal B., 2002, 26(3): 269-272.

[27] Milgram S.. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. London., 1974, 8(5): 312

[28] Boccaletti S., Bianconi G., Criado R., Genio C.I.D., Gómez–Gardeñes J., Romance M., Sendiña–Nadal I., Wang Z., Zanin M.. The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks. Physics Reports., 2014, 544(1): 1-122.

[29] Galam S., Wonczak S.. Dictatorship from majority rule voting. The European Physical Journal B–Condensed Matter and Complex Systems., 2000, 18(1): 183-186.

[30] Cox J.T.. Coalescing Random Walks and Voter Model Consensus Times on the Torus in Zd. Annals of Probability., 1989, 17(4): 1333-1366.

[31] Andreasen V., Lin J., Levin S.A.. The dynamics of cocirculating influenza strains conferring partial cross–immunity. Journal of Mathematical Biology., 1997, 35(7): 825.

[32] Hethcote H.W.. The Mathematics of Infectious Diseases. Siam Review., 2000, 42(4): 599-653.

[33] Wang W., Tang M., Yang H., Do Y., Lai Y.C., Lee G.W.. Asymmetrically interacting spreading dynamics on complex layered networks. Scientific Reports., 2014, 4(7502): 5097

[34] H X., Wang H., Xuan Z.. Opinion dynamics: A multidisciplinary review and perspective on future research. International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Sciences, 2011, 2(4): 72-91.

[35] Xu X., Li X., Bian Y., Sun Y.. Advance selling in the presence of product diffusion effect. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering., 2017, 26(1): 77-99.

[36] Moreno Y., Nekovee M., Pacheco A.F.. Dynamics of rumor spreading in complex networks. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics, 2004