Social networking services have been placed where people share opinions and information about various topics. These services allow users to express their opinions in direct (e.g., writing a comment or reply) and indirect ways (e.g., clicking a Like button). Based on commending, replying, and liking activities, users construct majority opinions in online environments. Previous studies examined perceptual and behavioral characteristics in the circumstance of majority opinions but only few of them provided how they differ depending on content types. Based on three different types of YouTube channels (news, documentary, and comedy), this study addresses how statistical properties of user opinions and majority opinions in online environments are presented differently depending on types of content. Based on the results of statistical analyses, we provide detailed properties of user activities in three types of YouTube channels and discuss several theoretical and practical implications.
AhsanM.KumariM.SharmaT. (2019). Rumors detection, verification and controlling mechanisms in online social networks: A survey. Online Social Networks and Media, 14, 100050.
2.
AlthoffT.JindalP.LeskovecJ. (2017). Online actions with offline impact: How online social networks influence online and offline user behavior. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining.
3.
AschS. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In GuetzkowH. (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men. Carnegie Press.
4.
AskerD.DinasE. (2019). Thinking fast and furious: Emotional intensity and opinion polarization in online media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(3), 487–509.
5.
BanischS.OlbrichE. (2019). Opinion polarization by learning from social feedback. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 43(2), 76–103.
6.
BarnfieldM. (2019). Think twice before jumping on the bandwagon: Clarifying concepts in research on the bandwagon effect. Political Studies Review, 1478929919870691.
7.
BessiA.ZolloF.Del VicarioM.PuligaM.ScalaA.CaldarelliG.UzziBQuattrociocchiW. (2016). Users polarization on Facebook and Youtube. PloS One, 11(8), e0159641.
8.
BuettnerR. (2017). Predicting user behavior in electronic markets based on personality-mining in large online social networks. Electronic Markets, 27(3), 247–265.
9.
ChanC.-h.FuK.-w. (2017). The relationship between cyberbalkanization and opinion polarization: Time-series analysis on Facebook pages and opinion polls during the Hong Kong occupy movement and the associated debate on political reform. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(5), 266–283.
10.
DandekarP.GoelA.LeeD. T. (2013). Biased assimilation, homophily, and the dynamics of polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(15), 5791–5796.
11.
Del VicarioM.ScalaA.CaldarelliG.StanleyH. E.QuattrociocchiW. (2017). Modeling confirmation bias and polarization. Scientific Reports, 7, 40391.
12.
DongY.DingZ.ChiclanaF.Herrera-ViedmaE. (2017). Dynamics of public opinions in an online and offline social network. IEEE Transactions on Big Data.
13.
DongY.ZhaQ.ZhangH.KouG.FujitaH.ChiclanaF.Herrera-ViedmaE. (2018). Consensus reaching in social network group decision making: Research paradigms and challenges. Knowledge-Based Systems, 162, 3–13.
14.
DongY.ZhanM.KouG.DingZ.LiangH. (2018). A survey on the fusion process in opinion dynamics. Information Fusion, 43, 57–65.
15.
DuttaS.DasD.KaurG.MongiaS.MukherjeeA.ChakrabortyT. (2019). Into the Battlefield: Quantifying and modeling intra-community conflicts in online discussion. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management.
16.
FarrellH. (2012). The consequences of the internet for politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 15, 35–52.
17.
FigueiredoF.AlmeidaJ. M.GonçalvesM. A.BenevenutoF. (2014). On the dynamics of social media popularity: A YouTube case study. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), 14(4), 1–23.
18.
FuW. W.SimC. C. (2011). Aggregate bandwagon effect on online videos’ viewership: Value uncertainty, popularity cues, and heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2382–2395.
19.
GibsonJ. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
20.
GroverP.KarA. K.DwivediY. K.JanssenM. (2019). Polarization and acculturation in US Election 2016 outcomes–Can twitter analytics predict changes in voting preferences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 438–460.
21.
GuoD.ZhaoY.ZhangL.WenX.YinC. (2019). Conformity feedback in an online review helpfulness evaluation task leads to less negative feedback-related negativity amplitudes and more positive P300 amplitudes. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 12(2), 73.
22.
HaT.LeeS. (2021). A heterophenomenological framework for analyzing user experiences with affordances. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–16.
23.
JainL.KataryaR. (2019). Discover opinion leader in online social network using firefly algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications, 122, 1–15.
24.
JaliliM. (2013). Social power and opinion formation in complex networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 392(4), 959–966.
25.
KastanakisM. N.BalabanisG. (2012). Between the mass and the class: Antecedents of the “bandwagon” luxury consumption behavior. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1399–1407.
26.
KimJ.TabibianB.OhA.SchölkopfB.Gomez-RodriguezM. (2018). Leveraging the crowd to detect and reduce the spread of fake news and misinformation. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining.
27.
LatourB.VenturiniT.JensenP. (2015). Fill in the gap. A new alliance for social and natural sciences. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18(2), 11.
28.
LeeS.AtkinsonL.SungY. H. (2020). Online bandwagon effects: Quantitative versus qualitative cues in online comments sections. New Media & Society, 1461444820965187.
29.
LeeS.HaT.LeeD.KimJ. H. (2018). Understanding the majority opinion formation process in online environments: An exploratory approach to Facebook. Information Processing & Management, 54(6), 1115–1128.
30.
LeibensteinH. (1950). Bandwagon, snob, and Veblen effects in the theory of consumers’ demand. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64(2), 183–207.
31.
LewinK. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. American Journal of Sociology, 44(6), 868–896.
32.
LinF.-J. (2008). Solving multicollinearity in the process of fitting regression model using the nested estimate procedure. Quality & Quantity, 42(3), 417–426.
33.
MercierH.MorinO. (2019). Majority rules: How good are we at aggregating convergent opinions?Evolutionary Human Sciences, 1, e6.
34.
MihaylovT.GeorgievG.NakovP. (2015). Finding opinion manipulation trolls in news community forums. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the nineteenth conference on computational natural language learning.
35.
MoussaïdM.KämmerJ. E.AnalytisP. P.NethH. (2013). Social influence and the collective dynamics of opinion formation. PloS One, 8(11), e78433.
36.
NakanoT.SudaT.OkaieY.MooreM. J. (2016). Analysis of cyber aggression and cyber-bullying in social networking. Paper presented at the 2016 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC).
37.
NekmatE.GonzenbachW. J. (2013). Multiple opinion climates in online forums: Role of website source reference and within-forum opinion congruency. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(4), 736–756.
38.
NickersonR. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.
39.
PasiG.YagerR. R. (2006). Modeling the concept of majority opinion in group decision making. Information Sciences, 176(4), 390–414.
40.
SalmonC. T.OshaganH. (1990). Community size, perceptions of majority opinion, and opinion expression. Journal of Public Relations Research, 2(1-4), 157–171.
41.
SherifM. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology, 27(187), 23–46.
42.
SobkowiczP. (2009). Modelling opinion formation with physics tools: Call for closer link with reality. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 12(1), 11.
TangJ.-H.ChenM.-C.YangC.-Y.ChungT.-Y.LeeY.-A. (2016). Personality traits, interpersonal relationships, online social support, and Facebook addiction. Telematics and Informatics, 33(1), 102–108.
45.
TjosvoldD.FieldR. H. (1983). Effects of social context on consensus and majority vote decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 26(3), 500–506.
46.
UrenaR.KouG.DongY.ChiclanaF.Herrera-ViedmaE. (2019). A review on trust propagation and opinion dynamics in social networks and group decision making frameworks. Information Sciences, 478, 461–475.
47.
WaddellT. F. (2018). What does the crowd think? How online comments and popularity metrics affect news credibility and issue importance. New Media & Society, 20(8), 3068–3083.
48.
XieJ.SreenivasanS.KornissG.ZhangW.LimC.SzymanskiB. K. (2011). Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities. Physical Review E, 84(1), 011130.
49.
XiongF.LiuY. (2014). Opinion formation on social media: An empirical approach. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 24(1), 013130.
50.
YinX.WangH.YinP.ZhuH. (2019). Agent-based opinion formation modeling in social network: A perspective of social psychology. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 532, 121786.
51.
ZhaQ.KouG.ZhangH.LiangH.ChenX.LiC.-C.DongY. (2020). Opinion dynamics in finance and business: A literature review and research opportunities. Financial Innovation, 6(1), 1–22.
52.
ZhangL.GuoD.WenX.LiY. (2020). Effect of other visible reviews’ votes and personality on review helpfulness evaluation: An event-related potentials study. Electronic Commerce Research, 1–25.
