IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v26y2020i4d10.1007_s10588-019-09297-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To illuminate and motivate: a fuzzy-trace model of the spread of information online

Author

Listed:
  • David A. Broniatowski

    (The George Washington University)

  • Valerie F. Reyna

    (Cornell University)

Abstract

We propose, and test, a model of online media platform users’ decisions to act on, and share, received information. Specifically, we focus on how mental representations of message content drive its spread. Our model is based on fuzzy-trace theory (FTT), a leading theory of decision under risk. Per FTT, online content is mentally represented in two ways: verbatim (objective, but decontextualized, facts), and gist (subjective, but meaningful, interpretation). Although encoded in parallel, gist tends to drive behaviors more strongly than verbatim representations for most individuals. Our model uses factors derived from FTT to make predictions regarding which content is more likely to be shared, namely: (a) different levels of mental representation, (b) the motivational content of a message, (c) difficulty of information processing (e.g., the ease with which a given message may be comprehended and, therefore, its gist extracted), and (d) social values.

Suggested Citation

  • David A. Broniatowski & Valerie F. Reyna, 2020. "To illuminate and motivate: a fuzzy-trace model of the spread of information online," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 431-464, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10588-019-09297-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-019-09297-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-019-09297-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-019-09297-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:6:p:435-448 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Valerie F. Reyna & Mary B. Adam, 2003. "Fuzzy‐Trace Theory, Risk Communication, and Product Labeling in Sexually Transmitted Diseases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 325-342, April.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:20-33 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. David A. Broniatowski & Eili Y. Klein & Valerie F. Reyna, 2015. "Germs Are Germs, and Why Not Take a Risk? Patients’ Expectations for Prescribing Antibiotics in an Inner-City Emergency Department," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(1), pages 60-67, January.
    5. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    6. Bjarke Mønsted & Piotr Sapieżyński & Emilio Ferrara & Sune Lehmann, 2017. "Evidence of complex contagion of information in social media: An experiment using Twitter bots," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-12, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deniz Marti & David A. Broniatowski, 2020. "Does gist drive NASA experts’ design decisions?," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 460-479, July.
    2. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    3. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    4. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," Post-Print halshs-02409314, HAL.
    5. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    6. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    7. Prokudina, Elena & Renneboog, Luc & Tobler, Philippe, 2015. "Does Confidence Predict Out-of-Domain Effort?," Discussion Paper 2015-055, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. Noussair, C.N. & Tucker, S. & Xu, Yilong, 2014. "A Future Market Reduces Bubbles but Allows Greater Profit for More Sophisticated Traders," Other publications TiSEM 43ded173-9eee-48a4-8a15-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Francis Bloch & Bhaskar Dutta & Stéphane Robin & Min Zhu, 2016. "The formation of partnerships in social networks," Post-Print halshs-01421347, HAL.
    10. Besedes, Tibor & Deck, Cary & Quintanar, Sarah & Sarangi, Sudipta & Shor, Mikhael, 2011. "Free-Riding and Performance in Collaborative and Non-Collaborative Groups," MPRA Paper 33948, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Jorrat, Diego & Alfonso-Costillo, Antonio & Espín, Antonio M. & Garcia, Teresa & Kovářík, Jaromír, 2020. "Exposure to the Covid-19 pandemic and generosity," MPRA Paper 103389, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Goswami, Indranil & Urminsky, Oleg, 2021. "Don’t fear the meter: How longer time limits bias managers to prefer hiring with flat fee compensation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 42-58.
    13. Marco Angrisani & Marco Cipriani & Antonio Guarino, 2022. "Strategic Sophistication and Trading Profits: An Experiment with Professional Traders," Staff Reports 1044, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    14. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2020. "The distribution of information and the price efficiency of markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    15. Anna Louisa Merkel & Johannes Lohse, 2019. "Is fairness intuitive? An experiment accounting for subjective utility differences under time pressure," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 24-50, March.
    16. Emily A. Elstad & Anne Sutkowi-Hemstreet & Stacey L. Sheridan & Maihan Vu & Russell Harris & Valerie F. Reyna & Christine Rini & Jo Anne Earp & Noel T. Brewer, 2015. "Clinicians’ Perceptions of the Benefits and Harms of Prostate and Colorectal Cancer Screening," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(4), pages 467-476, May.
    17. Michalis Drouvelis & Julian C. Jamison, 2015. "Selecting public goods institutions: Who likes to punish and reward?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(2), pages 501-534, October.
    18. Neyse, Levent & Bosworth, Steven & Ring, Patrick & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2016. "Overconfidence, Incentives and Digit Ratio," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 130145, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    19. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    20. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10588-019-09297-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.