↓ Skip to main content

Limits of social mobilization

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
37 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
podcasts
2 podcasts

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Limits of social mobilization
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, April 2013
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1216338110
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The Internet and social media have enabled the mobilization of large crowds to achieve time-critical feats, ranging from mapping crises in real time, to organizing mass rallies, to conducting search-and-rescue operations over large geographies. Despite significant success, selection bias may lead to inflated expectations of the efficacy of social mobilization for these tasks. What are the limits of social mobilization, and how reliable is it in operating at these limits? We build on recent results on the spatiotemporal structure of social and information networks to elucidate the constraints they pose on social mobilization. We use the DARPA Network Challenge as our working scenario, in which social media were used to locate 10 balloons across the United States. We conduct high-resolution simulations for referral-based crowdsourcing and obtain a statistical characterization of the population recruited, geography covered, and time to completion. Our results demonstrate that the outcome is plausible without the presence of mass media but lies at the limit of what time-critical social mobilization can achieve. Success relies critically on highly connected individuals willing to mobilize people in distant locations, overcoming the local trapping of diffusion in highly dense areas. However, even under these highly favorable conditions, the risk of unsuccessful search remains significant. These findings have implications for the design of better incentive schemes for social mobilization. They also call for caution in estimating the reliability of this capability.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 6 4%
Netherlands 2 1%
Germany 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 152 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 23%
Researcher 29 17%
Student > Master 20 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 7%
Other 37 22%
Unknown 20 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 35 20%
Social Sciences 28 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 8%
Physics and Astronomy 10 6%
Psychology 10 6%
Other 49 29%
Unknown 25 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2024.
All research outputs
#842,026
of 34,399,888 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#12,900
of 118,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,945
of 248,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#94
of 1,010 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,399,888 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 118,992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 248,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,010 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.