IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v40y2021i6p1147-1168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Competition for Attention in Social Media: National Women’s Soccer League Players on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Federico Rossi

    (Krannert School of Management, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907; Corresponding author)

  • Gaia Rubera

    (Marketing Department, Bocconi Institute of Data Science & Analytics Center, and Claudio Demattè Research Division at SDA, Bocconi University, 20100 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

Despite increasing use of social media, little is known about user competition and its effect on social platforms. In this research, we propose a model where social media users supply content in return for user attention. Using Twitter data on soccer players from the National Women’s Soccer League, we estimate a demand model where users decide how to allocate their attention among players, based on their content posted on social media and their performance on the soccer field. We consider the amount of tweets mentioning a player’s account as a measure for the level of attention captured by the player. On the supply side, players decide the amount of social media content posted on the platform. We show that the attention substitution between players depends on their posting activity and soccer performance but also on personal characteristics, such as physical attractiveness and team affiliation. Our analysis suggests that the competitive pressure to capture user attention is responsible for about one out of three tweets posted by players. This additional content benefits the social network, increasing by 7% the users’ activity on the platform. We also quantify the effect on user activity of a revenue-sharing model in which the platform rewards players for posting tweets.

Suggested Citation

  • Federico Rossi & Gaia Rubera, 2021. "Measuring Competition for Attention in Social Media: National Women’s Soccer League Players on Twitter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1147-1168, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:40:y:2021:i:6:p:1147-1168
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2021.1303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2021.1303
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.2021.1303?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Vries, Lisette & Gensler, Sonja & Leeflang, Peter S.H., 2012. "Popularity of Brand Posts on Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation of the Effects of Social Media Marketing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 83-91.
    2. Simon P. Anderson & André de Palma, 2012. "Competition for attention in the Information (overload) Age," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 1-25, March.
    3. Liye Ma & Baohong Sun & Sunder Kekre, 2015. "The Squeaky Wheel Gets the Grease—An Empirical Analysis of Customer Voice and Firm Intervention on Twitter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 627-645, September.
    4. Steven Berry & James Levinsohn & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 68-105, February.
    5. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    6. Federico Ciliberto & Elie Tamer, 2009. "Market Structure and Multiple Equilibria in Airline Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(6), pages 1791-1828, November.
    7. Olivier Toubia & Andrew T. Stephen, 2013. "Intrinsic vs. Image-Related Utility in Social Media: Why Do People Contribute Content to Twitter?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 368-392, May.
    8. Puneet Manchanda & Grant Packard & Adithya Pattabhiramaiah, 2015. "Social Dollars: The Economic Impact of Customer Participation in a Firm-Sponsored Online Customer Community," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 367-387, May.
    9. Ashish Goel & Pankaj Gupta & John Sirois & Dong Wang & Aneesh Sharma & Siva Gurumurthy, 2015. "The Who-To-Follow System at Twitter: Strategy, Algorithms, and Revenue Impact," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 98-107, February.
    10. Anja Lambrecht & Catherine Tucker & Caroline Wiertz, 2018. "Advertising to Early Trend Propagators: Evidence from Twitter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 177-199, March.
    11. Pradeep Chintagunta & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Khim Yong Goh, 2005. "Beyond the Endogeneity Bias: The Effect of Unmeasured Brand Characteristics on Household-Level Brand Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 832-849, May.
    12. Bresnahan, Timothy F, 1987. "Competition and Collusion in the American Automobile Industry: The 1955 Price War," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 457-482, June.
    13. Bresnahan, Timothy F & Reiss, Peter C, 1991. "Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(5), pages 977-1009, October.
    14. Ganesh Iyer & Zsolt Katona, 2016. "Competing for Attention in Social Communication Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(8), pages 2304-2320, August.
    15. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, March.
    16. Beth L. Fossen & David A. Schweidel, 2017. "Television Advertising and Online Word-of-Mouth: An Empirical Investigation of Social TV Activity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 105-123, January.
    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. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    2. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    3. Nicholas Economides & Katja Seim & V. Brian Viard, 2008. "Quantifying the benefits of entry into local phone service," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 699-730, September.
    4. W. Ross Morrow & Steven J. Skerlos, 2011. "Fixed-Point Approaches to Computing Bertrand-Nash Equilibrium Prices Under Mixed-Logit Demand," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 328-345, April.
    5. Reiss, Peter C. & Wolak, Frank A., 2003. "Structural Econometric Modeling: Rationales and Examples from Industrial Organization," Research Papers 1831, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Yang Li & Asim Ansari, 2014. "A Bayesian Semiparametric Approach for Endogeneity and Heterogeneity in Choice Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1161-1179, May.
    7. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2014. "Identification in Differentiated Products Markets Using Market Level Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1749-1797, September.
    8. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. J. Levin & L. Einav, 2012. "Empirical Industrial Organization: A Progress Report," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 1.
    10. Lee Branstetter & Chirantan Chatterjee & Matthew J. Higgins, 2016. "Regulation and welfare: evidence from paragraph IV generic entry in the pharmaceutical industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 857-890, November.
    11. Juan Esteban Carranza & Alejandra Ximena González, 2014. "Estimación de la demanda de vehículos nuevos de los hogares colombianos entre 2001 y 2011," Borradores de Economia 11570, Banco de la Republica.
    12. Kim Kyoo il & Petrin Amil, 2015. "Tests for Price Endogeneity in Differentiated Product Models," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 47-69, January.
    13. Amit Gandhi Gandhi & Zhentong Lu & Xiaoxia Shi, 2013. "Estimating demand for differentiated products with error in market shares," CeMMAP working papers 03/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    14. Jason Allen & Robert Clark & Jean-François Houde, 2019. "Search Frictions and Market Power in Negotiated-Price Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1550-1598.
    15. Michaela Draganska & Michael Mazzeo & Katja Seim, 2009. "Beyond plain vanilla: Modeling joint product assortment and pricing decisions," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 105-146, June.
    16. Nail Kashaev, 2018. "Identification and estimation of multinomial choice models with latent special covariates," Papers 1811.05555, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    17. Doi, Naoshi & Ohashi, Hiroshi, 2019. "Market structure and product quality: A study of the 2002 Japanese airline merger," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 158-193.
    18. Minjae Song, 2007. "Measuring consumerwelfareinthe CPU market: anapplication of the pure-characteristics demand model," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 429-446, June.
    19. Marius Johnen & Oliver Schnittka, 2019. "When pushing back is good: the effectiveness of brand responses to social media complaints," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 858-878, September.
    20. Federico Ciliberto & Jonathan W. Williams, 2014. "Does multimarket contact facilitate tacit collusion? Inference on conduct parameters in the airline industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(4), pages 764-791, December.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:40:y:2021:i:6:p:1147-1168. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.