A Conflict-Integrated Theory of Influence: Reconciling Top-Down and Bottom-Up Agenda-Setting in Digital Networks

Chong’s study on #MarchForOurLives identifies both key influencers (elites) and massive amplification by ordinary users, echoing ongoing debates about top-down vs. bottom-up influence. Instead of treating these findings as contradictory, this research would systematically map out when and how each dynamic dominates, using mixed methods across multiple platforms and topics. The framework would integrate network metrics (e.g., centrality, clustering) and content analysis to characterize distinct diffusion "regimes," identifying structural and contextual factors (like event type or network fragmentation) that tip the balance. By explicitly theorizing the conditions under which agenda-setting power shifts, this project not only addresses conflicts in the literature but provides practical tools for activists, policymakers, and platforms. It builds on Chong (source 1, conflict heuristic) and Okine et al. (crowdfunding), but moves beyond case-by-case analysis toward a unified, predictive theory.

References:

1. Twitter and the Affordance of Public Agenda-Setting: A Case Study of #MarchForOurLives. Mi Young Chong (None).
2. Measuring crowdfunding success for small and medium‐sized enterprises sustainable development: Insight from the social networking theory. Agnes Naa Dedei Okine, Yao Li, Isaac Edem Djimesah, Hongjiang Zhao, Elijah Duah, Kingsford Kissi Mireku, Kenneth Wilson Adjei Budu, Daniel Baani Adjei (2024). Business Strategy & Development.