Jason Axtell wrote:
> We already have a "science" devoted to meme epidemiology: marketing.
Good point at first glance, but... it seems to me that marketing bears the same
relationship to a true science of memes that, say, alchemy bears to chemistry.
It may generate certain practical results in some contexts, but it explains
little of why and how it works. There are some high points; anyone wanting a
glimpse at the scientific side of marketing should take a look at, for example,
the Bass model for diffusion of innovations. [1-3] are general overviews /
explorations of diffusion, but the original paper by Bass et. al. is worth the
read; Journal of Marketing circa 1990, IIRC. On a semi-related topic, check out
[4].
[1]
http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/acad_unit/marketing/faculty/Ainslie/HVBCbass.pdf
[2] http://nt00.marketing.unsw.edu.au/USER/CHRISD/sess8-4/sld007.htm
[3] http://fourps.wharton.upenn.edu/ideas/pdf/00-004.pdf
[4] Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks Between Order and Randomness by
Watts
jb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:26:10 PDT