2017
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2990436
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Human Flesh Search: What Did We Find?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, behavioral contagion refers to the tendency or process in which certain behaviors exhibited by an actor are copied by observers who are socially related to the original actor (Heng et al , 2019; Liao et al , 2020). However, in contrast to other types of social influence, such as social pressures or conformity, in behavioral contagion the actor does not intend to evoke such copying process (Wheeler, 1966).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Second, behavioral contagion refers to the tendency or process in which certain behaviors exhibited by an actor are copied by observers who are socially related to the original actor (Heng et al , 2019; Liao et al , 2020). However, in contrast to other types of social influence, such as social pressures or conformity, in behavioral contagion the actor does not intend to evoke such copying process (Wheeler, 1966).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in contrast to other types of social influence, such as social pressures or conformity, in behavioral contagion the actor does not intend to evoke such copying process (Wheeler, 1966). As antisocial behaviors might be more contagious than pro-social ones (Dimant, 2019), prior research has typically used a theory of behavioral contagion to explain spreading undesirable behaviors (Heng et al , 2019). It has been confirmed that employees may have a tendency to imitate undesirable or even deviant behaviors at the workplace (Gino et al , 2009; Robinson et al , 2014).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of the path prediction of a SIS, most scholars [25][26][27] mainly establish similarity indicators based on the structural characteristics of the network, such as the nearest neighbor, the degree of nodes, and the degree of community contribution, and judge whether a link relationship exists between nodes by ranking similarity. Heng et al [28] established three contagious mechanisms driving SIS behavior (i.e., fueled emotionalism, blind acceptance, and collective amnesia) and two noncontagious mechanisms (i.e., isolated dissension and sluggish update), which also provide insights into the technology affordances and constraints. Critical theoretical contributions and important practical implications for SIS initiators, facilitators, and designers of forums have been discussed [28] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Heng et al [28] established three contagious mechanisms driving SIS behavior (i.e., fueled emotionalism, blind acceptance, and collective amnesia) and two noncontagious mechanisms (i.e., isolated dissension and sluggish update), which also provide insights into the technology affordances and constraints. Critical theoretical contributions and important practical implications for SIS initiators, facilitators, and designers of forums have been discussed [28] . These methods are simple in calculation and low in complexity, but they are mostly based on static network structures, ignoring the influence of dynamic changes in netizens attributes in social networks [1] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%