Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Network Diagram by Alden Klovdahl, Australian National University
Network Diagram by Alden Klovdahl, Australian National University
September 6, 2006
Agenda
SNA as a discipline Introduction to the field Critical assessment Frontier
Software
UCINET 6/NETDRAW; PAJEK STRUCTURE; GRADAP; KRACKPLOT
Listservs
SOCNET listserv (1993) REDES listserv UCINET users group
Textbooks
Kilduff & Tsai, 2004 Scott, John. 1991/2000. Degenne & Fors. 1999. Wasserman & Faust. 1994.
Explosive Growth
4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1988
600
Google page rank Social networking software Management consulting Network organizations
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
500
Social Network
Population Ecology
400
300
Embeddedness, social capital, structural holes, alliances TCE, RD, Inst theory, SRT, etc
200
100 y = 0.001e
2
0.134x
1930s Sociometry
Moreno; Hawthorne studies Erdos
1940s Psychologists
Clique formally defined
1950s Anthropologists
Barnes, Bott & Manchester school
The methodology
Dyadic, autocorrelated data require different statistical methods
Theoretical perspective
Not a single theory across all disciplines, but some common principles and perspectives
A Multi-layered Enterprise
Conceptual Layer
Deepest metaphors Taken for granted axioms
Technical Layer
Graph theory Theoretical vocabulary network constructs Methodology Network antecedents Network consequences Interface with other research streams
Substantive Layer
Conceptual Layer
Actors do not act independently
Have ties of various kinds with other actors
Structure of ties in the network has profound effects on the capabilities, constraints and ultimately outcomes of the network and its constituents Bavelas-Leavitt work (1950s) on centralization of work teams
Presentation @ National Academy of Sciences 2005 Steve Borgatti
PA 1 GA 2 GA 1 FL 2 TX 1 FL 1 LA 4
LA 5
LA 1
LA 2
Traditional soc sci focuses on actor attributes as explanatory variables Sexual relations among Network science focuses patients with rare cancers --- Bill Darrow, CDC on relations among the actors Influences & flows of Connectionist view
Tell each other information Provide material aid Copy attitudes & behavior Transmit diseases
NY 5 NY 21 NJ 1 NY 16 NY7 NY 2 NY 12 LA 7 NY 13 SF 1 LA 6 LA 8 LA 9
LA 3
NY 10
NY 3
0
NY 15
NY 4
NY 19
NY 9
NY 11 NY 8 NY 14
NY 17 NY 22
NY 1
NY 18
NY 20 NY 6
profit
social capital
200
150
100
50
0 0
1000
20
40
60
80
100
120
100
10
y = 275.81x-1 .7 1 47 2 R = 0.9287 1
10
100
0.1
Technical Layer
Key Constructs that are good to think with
What is a Network?
A set of actors (nodes, points, vertices)
Individuals (e.g., persons, chimps) Collectivities (e.g., firms, nations, species)
A set of ties (links, lines, edges, arcs) that connect pairs of actors
Directed or undirected Valued or presence/absence
Set of ties of a given type constitutes a social relation Different relations have different structures & consequences
1000 scientists
Presentation @ National Academy of Sciences 2005 Steve Borgatti
Interactions
Sent email to, had sex with Communicated with
Flows
Personnel Goods Ideas/information Infection
Correlations
Co-membership Similarity Proximity
Influence
Roads
Traffic
Each kind of tie (i.e., social relation) defines a different network 2005 Steve Borgatti
Simple Answers
Who you ask for answers to straightforward questions.
Recent acquisition Older acquisitions Original company Cross, R., Borgatti, S.P., & Parker, A. 2001. Beyond Answers: Dimensions of the Advice Network. Social Networks 23(3): 215-235
Problem Reformulation
Who you see to help you think through issues
Recent acquisition Older acquisitions Original company Cross, R., Borgatti, S.P., & Parker, A. 2001. Beyond Answers: Dimensions of the Advice Network. Social Networks 23(3): 215-235
W4 W2 W5 W1 W7 W9
W2
W4 W9 W5 W7 W8
W1 W8
I1 I1 W3 W6
W3
W6
S2
W4 W2 W5 W1 W7 W8 W9
I1
W3 W6
2005 Steve Borgatti
GREEN = games only RED = fights only BLACK = games & fights Presentation @ National Academy of Sciences
Through members
Internet Alliances
Microsoft AOL
Yahoo
AT&T
OCIS CM HCM OM
GDO
ODC HR
MC
TIM
MH
CAR
OB
OMT
BPS
IM
RM ENT
Cases (entities)
Friendship Jim Jill Jen Joe Jim - 1 0 1 Jill 1 - 1 0 Jen 0 1 1 Joe 1 0 1 Proximity Jim Jim Jill 3 Jen 9 Joe 2
Jim - Jill Jim - Jen Jim - Joe Jill - Jen Jill - Joe Jen - Joe
Friendship Proximity 1 3 0 9 1 2 1 1 0 15 1 3
Multiple relations recorded for the same set of actors Each relation is a variable
variables can also be defined at more aggregate levels
Values are assigned to pairs of actors Hypotheses can be phrased in terms of correlations between relations
Dyadic-level hypotheses
2005 Steve Borgatti
Ego Networks
Combine the perspective of network analysis with the data of mainstream social science
Characterize relationship with each alter Obtain attribute data about each alter (egos perception) Optionally obtain egos perception of which alters have ties with which other alters
Levels of Analysis
Dyad (relationship) level
Network data is fundamentally dyadic
Who is friends with whom in an office Distance in meters between peoples desks Marriage ties among families in Renaissance Florence Business ties among the same families
Shape
Cohesion
degree
Group level
faction
clique
closeness
block
Node level
Dyad level
regular equivalence
2005 Steve Borgatti
simmelian tie
Density of ties
Density = proportion of pairs of actors that are actually tied In some contexts, could be thought of as measure of social capital
Village 1
Data from Entwistle et al
Presentation @ National Academy of Sciences 2005 Steve Borgatti
Village 2
Data from Entwistle et al
Presentation @ National Academy of Sciences 2005 Steve Borgatti
Graph-Theoretic Distance
AKA degrees of separation
10
The graph-theoretic distance between two nodes is the number of links in the shortest path that connects them
Distance from 4 to 10 is 3 links
12 11 8 9 2 7
Core/Periphery Structures
Core/Periphery
Network consists of single group (a core) together with hangers-on (a periphery),
Core connects to all Periphery connects only to the core
C/P
Short distances, good for transmitting information, practices Identification with group as whole E.g., structure of physics
Clique structure
Multiple subgroups or factions Identity with subgroup Diversity of norms, belief E.g., structure of social science
Clique