Scientific America

Question

The following is part of a Scientific America article:

"In Twitter, for example, it gives rise to what might be called the follower paradox: most people have fewer followers than their followers do. Before you resolve to become more scintillating, remember that most people are in similar, sparsely populated boats."

Two questions.
Q1. What's the meaning of 'their followers'? I thought it meant those who follow "them" in Twitter? Then, how come "most people have fewer followers than their followers do"? Isn't it the other way around?

Q2. What exactly does the author want the readers to do in the last sentence (Before ~ boats.)?

If you need more context, you can read the article here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-youre-probably-less-popular/

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

Scientific American

AnonymousQ1. What's the meaning of 'their followers'? I thought it meant those who follow "them" in Twitter?

That's right.

AnonymousThen, how come "most people have fewer followers than their followers do"? Isn't it the other way around?

That's the paradox.

AnonymousQ2. What exactly does the author want the readers to do in the last sentence (Before ~ boats.)?

Not bother to try to be scintillating, since not so many people are following you (there are not many people in your boat).

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousQ1. What's the meaning of 'their followers'? I thought it meant those who follow "them" in Twitter?

You are right.

AnonymousThen, how come "most people have fewer followers than their followers do"? Isn't it the other way around?

That is why it is called a paradox. Look up "paradox" in your dictionary.

AnonymousBefore you resolve to become more scintillating,

Resolve = make a promise to yourself.
"more scintillating" = more exciting, sparking, attractive to lots of others.

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you, Mister Micawber and AlpheccaStars.
Actually, I do know what 'paradox' means.
The reason why I asked Q1 was because I couldn't believe whether in Twitter your followers do seem more popular than you are (I don't tweet. So if you do, please let me know.).

I mean, I don't know what you call the person you follow in Twitter, but let's call them "followees" for now. I thought the article might have been more reasonable at least to me if it read like "most people have fewer followers than their followees do." I mean, I thought you would tend to follow someone who you'd like to know about, so it's not exactly the same situation as with the "real-life friends". So I was wondering the same paradox applies in Twitter the way the article has described, and I still wonder.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousThe reason why I asked Q1 was because I couldn't believe whether in Twitter your followers do seem more popular than you are (I don't tweet. So if you do, please let me know.).

I wouldn't know either, but apparently someone has done the statistics, and that is what the data showed.

The person who follows someone is a follower.

Most people have fewer followers, than their followers do.
Let's parse this with an example:

John has a twitter account. He has 4 followers: Jay, Joe, Jim, and Jeff.

Jay has 7 followers: Meg, Marge, Misty, Melody, Mona, Madge, and Minnie. So Jay has more followers than John.
Joe has 5 followers: Larry, Lindsey, Larson, Leslie, and Lefty. So Joe has more followers than John.
Jim has 12 followers. (...)
Jeff has 3. (...)

So of John's 4 followers, three of them have more followers than he does.

You can then examine Jay's followers to see if they have more followers than he does.
And so on.
Apparently, the study showed that most people's followers have more followers than they do.

Anonymous · Answer

AlpheccaStars AnonymousThe reason why I asked Q1 was because I couldn't believe whether in Twitter your followers do seem more popular than you are (I don't tweet. So if you do, please let me know.).I wouldn't know either, but apparently someone has done the statistics, and that is what the data showed. The person who follows someone is a follower. Most people have fewer followers, than their followers do.Let's parse this with an example:John has a twitter account. He has 4 followers: Jay, Joe, Jim, and Jeff.Jay has 7 followers: Meg, Marge, Misty, Melody, Mona, Madge, and Minnie. So Jay has more followers than John.Joe has 5 followers: Larry, Lindsey, Larson, Leslie, and Lefty. So Joe has more followers than John.Jim has 12 followers. (...)Jeff has 3. (...)So of John's 4 followers, three of them have more followers than he does.You can then examine Jay's followers to see if they have more followers than he does.And so on.Apparently, the study showed that most people's followers have more followers than they do.

Again, thanks for the explanation. I think that must have been it, because honestly I cannot think of any other.

That said, I still cannot figure out how that could be possible. Maybe it's just me, but it just doesn't add up. I mean, if that were actually what the study had found out, the study essentially would be establishing the seemingly untenable premise that a more popular person would tend to follow a less popular one in the Twitter world, and that it's never the other way around. Go figure.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

AnonymousGo figure.

I think that is what they did.
Statistics is very often counter-intuitive, just like quantum mechanics.

Blue Jay · Answer

I looked at the article, and it wasn't explained how this conclusion was reached, but it followed a section explaining why we are more likely to be friends with popular people. Presumably the person whom you follow on Twitter might follow you in return, so you each get one follower out of the deal. If this mutual following is widely repeated among your followers/followees, the fact that you are friends with popular people might tend to mean that they average more followers than you, because they are in more mutual-following relationships than you.
I have a Twitter account, but I have no followers, and am following three people (well, not really, I never look at Twitter). I also have a Facebook account, where I have 11 friends, who average 500 friends each. My friends are, on average, 45 times more popular than I am. Of course, I've met all my FB friends.

Anonymous · Answer

Blue JayI looked at the article, and it wasn't explained how this conclusion was reached, but it followed a section explaining why we are more likely to be friends with popular people. Presumably the person whom you follow on Twitter might follow you in return, so you each get one follower out of the deal. If this mutual following is widely repeated among your followers/followees, the fact that you are friends with popular people might tend to mean that they average more followers than you, because they are in more mutual-following relationships than you.I have a Twitter account, but I have no followers, and am following three people (well, not really, I never look at Twitter). I also have a Facebook account, where I have 11 friends, who average 500 friends each. My friends are, on average, 45 times more popular than I am. Of course, I've met all my FB friends.

Thanks, Blue Jay. The "mutual-following" thing really helped clear things up for me. I must say that's a little deep for me, though.

Perhaps, Facebook might have been an easier example for me to better understand the whole thing.

Scientific America

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions