- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Competition between simple and complex contagion on temporal networks

Elsa Andres1, Romualdo Pastor-Satorras2, Michele Starnini3,4, and Márton Karsai1,5,*

  • *Contact author: karsaim@ceu.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043088 – Published 22 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/2l6j-46rh

Abstract

Behavioral adoptions of individuals are influenced by their peers in different ways. While in some cases an individual may change behavior after a single incoming influence, in other cases multiple cumulated attempts of social influence are necessary for the same outcome. These two mechanisms, known as simple and complex contagion, often occur together in social contagion phenomena, yet their distinguishability based on the observable contagion dynamics is challenging. In this paper we define a social contagion model evolving on temporal networks where individuals can switch between contagion mechanisms. We explore three spreading scenarios: predominated by simple or complex contagion, or where the dominant mechanism changes during the unfolding process. We propose analytical and numerical methods relying on global spreading observables to identify which of these three scenarios characterizes a social spreading outbreak. This work offers insights into social contagion dynamics on temporal networks, without assuming prior knowledge about the contagion mechanism driving the adoptions of individuals.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (55)

  1. N. A. Christakis and J. H. Fowler, Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior, Stat. Med. 32, 556 (2013).
  2. C. Castellano, S. Fortunato, and V. Loreto, Statistical physics of social dynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 591 (2009).
  3. S. Jose, Covid vaccine and generation z—a study of factors influencing adoption, Young Consumers 23, 16 (2022).
  4. N. A. Christakis and J. H. Fowler, The collective dynamics of smoking in a large social network, N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 2249 (2008).
  5. N. O. Hodas and K. Lerman, The simple rules of social contagion, Sci. Rep. 4, 4343 (2014).
  6. F. M. Bass, A new product growth for model consumer durables, Manag. Sci. 15, 215 (1969).
  7. E. M. Rogers, A. Singhal, and M. M. Quinlan, Diffusion of innovations, in An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research (Routledge, Milton Park, UK, 2014), pp. 432–448.
  8. R. I. Dunbar, The social brain hypothesis, Evol. Anthropol.: News Issues Rev. 6, 178 (1998).
  9. D. Easley and J. Kleinberg, Strong and weak ties, in Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning About a Highly Connected World (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010), p. 47.
  10. M. Granovetter, Threshold models of collective behavior, Am. J. Sociol. 83, 1420 (1978).
  11. T. C. Schelling, Dynamic models of segregation, J. Math. Sociol. 1, 143 (1971).
  12. M. Karsai, N. Perra, and A. Vespignani, Time varying networks and the weakness of strong ties, Sci. Rep. 4, 4001 (2014).
  13. J. P. Gleeson, Binary-state dynamics on complex networks: Pair approximation and beyond, Phys. Rev. X 3, 021004 (2013).
  14. D. J. Daley and D. G. Kendall, Stochastic rumours, IMA J. Appl. Math. 1, 42 (1965).
  15. D. P. Maki, Mathematical Models and Applications: With Emphasis on the Social, Life, and Management Sciences (Pearson College Division, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1973).
  16. M. Barthélemy, A. Barrat, R. Pastor-Satorras, and A. Vespignani, Velocity and hierarchical spread of epidemic outbreaks in scale-free networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 178701 (2004).
  17. R. Pastor-Satorras, C. Castellano, P. Van Mieghem, and A. Vespignani, Epidemic processes in complex networks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 925 (2015).
  18. D. Centola and M. Macy, Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties, Am. J. Sociol. 113, 702 (2007).
  19. D. J. Watts, A simple model of global cascades on random networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 5766 (2002).
  20. A. Barrat, M. Barthelemy, and A. Vespignani, Dynamical Processes on Complex Networks (Cambridge university press, Cambridge, 2008).
  21. W. Chen, C. Castillo, and L. V. Lakshmanan, Information and Influence Propagation in Social Networks (Springer Nature, London, 2022).
  22. Y. Moreno, M. Nekovee, and A. F. Pacheco, Dynamics of rumor spreading in complex networks, Phys. Rev. E 69, 066130 (2004).
  23. D. Centola, The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment, Science 329, 1194 (2010).
  24. M. S. Granovetter, The strength of weak ties, Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360 (1973).
  25. Z. Yang and T. Zhou, Epidemic spreading in weighted networks: An edge-based mean-field solution, Phys. Rev. E 85, 056106 (2012).
  26. S. Unicomb, G. Iñiguez, and M. Karsai, Threshold driven contagion on weighted networks, Sci. Rep. 8, 3094 (2018).
  27. M. De Domenico, C. Granell, M. A. Porter, and A. Arenas, The physics of spreading processes in multilayer networks, Nat. Phys. 12, 901 (2016).
  28. S. Unicomb, G. Iñiguez, J. Kertész, and M. Karsai, Reentrant phase transitions in threshold driven contagion on multiplex networks, Phys. Rev. E 100, 040301 (2019).
  29. P. Holme and F. Liljeros, Birth and death of links control disease spreading in empirical contact networks, Sci. Rep. 4, 4999 (2014).
  30. M. Karsai, M. Kivelä, R. K. Pan, K. Kaski, J. Kertész, A.-L. Barabási, and J. Saramäki, Small but slow world: How network topology and burstiness slow down spreading, Phys. Rev. E 83, 025102 (2011).
  31. M. Karsai, G. Iñiguez, R. Kikas, K. Kaski, and J. Kertész, Local cascades induced global contagion: How heterogeneous thresholds, exogenous effects, and unconcerned behaviour govern online adoption spreading, Sci. Rep. 6, 27178 (2016).
  32. A. Badie-Modiri, A. K. Rizi, M. Karsai, and M. Kivelä, Directed percolation in temporal networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L022047 (2022).
  33. M. Kivelä, R. K. Pan, K. Kaski, J. Kertész, J. Saramäki, and M. Karsai, Multiscale analysis of spreading in a large communication network, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. (2012) P03005.
  34. S. Unicomb, G. Iñiguez, J. P. Gleeson, and M. Karsai, Dynamics of cascades on burstiness-controlled temporal networks, Nat. Commun. 12, 133 (2021).
  35. T. Takaguchi, N. Masuda, and P. Holme, Bursty communication patterns facilitate spreading in a threshold-based epidemic dynamics, PLoS One 8, e68629 (2013).
  36. F. Karimi and P. Holme, Threshold model of cascades in empirical temporal networks, Physica A 392, 3476 (2013).
  37. M. Karsai, H.-H. Jo, and K. Kaski, Bursty Human Dynamics (Springer, Berlin, 2018).
  38. G. Cencetti, D. A. Contreras, M. Mancastroppa, and A. Barrat, Distinguishing simple and complex contagion processes on networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 247401 (2023).
  39. D. A. Contreras, G. Cencetti, and A. Barrat, Infection patterns in simple and complex contagion processes on networks, PLoS Comput. Biol. 20, e1012206 (2024).
  40. E. Andres, G. Ódor, I. Iacopini, and M. Karsai, Distinguishing mechanisms of social contagion from local network view, npj Complex. 2, 8 (2025).
  41. L. Hébert-Dufresne, S. V. Scarpino, and J.-G. Young, Macroscopic patterns of interacting contagions are indistinguishable from social reinforcement, Nat. Phys. 16, 426 (2020).
  42. A. Czaplicka, R. Toral, and M. San Miguel, Competition of simple and complex adoption on interdependent networks, Phys. Rev. E 94, 062301 (2016).
  43. F. Diaz-Diaz, M. San Miguel, and S. Meloni, Echo chambers and information transmission biases in homophilic and heterophilic networks, Sci. Rep. 12, 9350 (2022).
  44. P. D. Karampourniotis, S. Sreenivasan, B. K. Szymanski, and G. Korniss, The impact of heterogeneous thresholds on social contagion with multiple initiators, PLoS One 10, e0143020 (2015).
  45. P. S. Dodds and D. J. Watts, Universal behavior in a generalized model of contagion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 218701 (2004).
  46. W. Wang, M. Tang, P. Shu, and Z. Wang, Dynamics of social contagions with heterogeneous adoption thresholds: crossover phenomena in phase transition, New J. Phys. 18, 013029 (2016).
  47. B. Min and M. San Miguel, Competing contagion processes: Complex contagion triggered by simple contagion, Sci. Rep. 8, 10422 (2018).
  48. N. Horsevad, D. Mateo, R. E. Kooij, A. Barrat, and R. Bouffanais, Transition from simple to complex contagion in collective decision-making, Nat. Commun. 13, 1442 (2022).
  49. N. Perra, B. Gonçalves, R. Pastor-Satorras, and A. Vespignani, Activity driven modeling of time varying networks, Sci. Rep. 2, 469 (2012).
  50. M. Starnini and R. Pastor-Satorras, Topological properties of a time-integrated activity-driven network, Phys. Rev. E 87, 062807 (2013).
  51. Here we define the activity as an activation probability. Other works [50] consider ai as an activation rate, or probability per unit time.
  52. In general the ϕ threshold is sampled from a P(ϕ) distribution. Here for simplicity we assume that P(ϕ) is a dirac distribution; thus each node has the same adoption threshold.
  53. M. E. Newman, The structure and function of complex networks, SIAM Rev. 45, 167 (2003).
  54. A. Moinet, M. Starnini, and R. Pastor-Satorras, Burstiness and aging in social temporal networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 108701 (2015).
  55. M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, New York, 1972).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043088– Published 22 October, 2025
  • Received 2 December 2024
  • Accepted 16 July 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation