@misc{38042,
  author       = {{Fortmeier, Julia}},
  title        = {{{Anreizwirkungen der Bonusregelung - Eine wettbewerbspolitische Analyse}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{38045,
  author       = {{Hagedorn, Carolin}},
  title        = {{{The intersection of privacy and competition law - Lessons from data-driven mergers}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{38097,
  author       = {{Ayyildiz, Berfin}},
  title        = {{{Die Akquisition von Double Click durch Google - eine wettbewerbspolitische Analyse}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{38093,
  author       = {{Shelepova, Ekaterina}},
  title        = {{{Merger Analysis in Data-Driven Markets - An Economic Policy Perspective}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{38096,
  author       = {{Shanmugaratnam, Suganya}},
  title        = {{{Marktmacht in digitalen Märkten}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{38099,
  author       = {{Faizan, Ahmed}},
  title        = {{{The Effectiveness of Leniency Programs and Whistleblowing in Discouraging Cartel Activities}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@article{35756,
  abstract     = {{<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title>
<jats:p>Leveraging social action theory, social network theory and the notion of network externality, the purpose of this paper is to model two different return on investment (ROI) measures: the networked ROI which captures the network effect originating from a social media investment, and the discrete ROI which focuses social media discrete returns from individual users.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title>
<jats:p>A field experiment was set up over a period of three months to test the effects of two variants of an advertisement campaign (a social vs a discrete ad) on the modeled networked and discrete ROIs.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title>
<jats:p>The authors find that emphasizing discrete user actions leads to lower network gains, but higher monetary returns while the social action emphasis produces higher network gains, but lower monetary returns. The study further suggests that social action focus is preferable for brand promotion and engagement, whereas the discrete action focus is suitable for boosting sales and website traffic.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Practical implications</jats:title>
<jats:p>Several potential implications for social media researchers and marketers are also discussed.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title>
<jats:p>The authors for the first time showed that that the social media returns are derived not only from individual actions taken by the user (e.g. likes and shares) but also from users’ social interdependencies and the additional exposure that results from network effects.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>}},
  author       = {{Khan, Gohar and Mohaisen, Manar and Trier, Matthias}},
  issn         = {{1066-2243}},
  journal      = {{Internet Research}},
  keywords     = {{Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science, Communication}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{631--652}},
  publisher    = {{Emerald}},
  title        = {{{The network ROI}}},
  doi          = {{10.1108/intr-07-2018-0346}},
  volume       = {{30}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42296,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Intermediaries in Networks}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42286,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Logrolling-Prozess: Theorie und formale Darstellung einer verhandlungsunterstützenden Methode}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42290,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Stability in two-sided matchings with asymmetric information}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42289,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Sincere and Sophisticated Players in Matching Markets}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42291,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Mechanismen zur Informationsgewinnung in Verhandlungen}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42288,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Die faire Verteilung unteilbarer Güter}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42295,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Axiomatisierungen des Banzhaf-Wertes}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42293,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Compatibilities in Matching Mechanisms}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42284,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Faire Aufteilung von unteilbaren Gütern: Untersuchung von Algorithmen auf Effizienz und Neidfreiheit}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42280,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Anwendung und Vergleich von Verhandlungslösungen auf das Netzwerk-Design-Problem}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42285,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Verhandlungen mit Intermediären in IT-Märkten: eine spieltheoretische Analyse}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{42281,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{A bargaining model for relative profit and market share delegation contracts}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

@misc{41926,
  author       = {{N., N.}},
  publisher    = {{Universität Paderborn}},
  title        = {{{Wettbewerb in Märkten für Dienstleitungen mit uninformierten Kunden}}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}