The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Logit Models and Logistic Regressions for Social Networks: I. An Introduction to Markov Graphs and p
Abstract
Spanning nearly sixty years of research, statistical network analysis has passed through (at least) two generations of researchers and models. Beginning in the late 1930's, the first generation of research dealt with the distribution of various network statistics, under a variety of null models. The second generation, beginning in the 1970's and continuing into the 1980's, concerned models, usually for probabilities of relational ties among very small subsets of actors, in which various simple substantive tendencies were parameterized. Much of this research, most of which utilized log linear models, first appeared in applied statistics publications. But recent developments in social network analysis promise to bring us into a third generation. The Markov random graphs of Frank and Strauss (1986) and especially the estimation strategy for these models developed by Strauss and Ikeda (1990; described in brief in Strauss, 1992), are very recent and promising contributions to this field. Here we describe a large class of models that can be used to investigate structure in social networks. These models include several generalizations of stochastic blockmodels, as well as models parameterizing global tendencies towards clustering and centralization, and individual differences in such tendencies. Approximate model fits are obtained using Strauss and Ikeda's (1990) estimation strategy. In this paper we describe and extend these models and demonstrate how they can be used to address a variety of substantive questions about structure in social networks.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“ERGM are a generalised (as evolved from Markov graphs: Wasserman and Pattison 1996) form of graph-theoretic models that support statistical reasoning on network data, and could (at least in principle) overcome the weakness of relying on undirected and dyadic relationships.”
From Exploratory network reconstruction with sparse archaeological data and XTENT (2022) · cites this paper as Wasserman and Pattison 1996
Citations
Cites
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Self-citationAgresti, A. (2002) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471249688 · Cited by 6,746
Research works printed but not linked: 34
- Pattison, Logit models and logistic regressions for social networks: II. Extensions and generalizations to valued and bivariate relations, Journal of Quantitative Anthropology
- 10.1002/0471725218 · DOI · Paper page
- Sampson, 1968, A novitiate in a period of change: An experimental and case study of relationships
- Holland, 1975, Sociological methodology 1976, 1
- Vickers, 1981, Representing classroom social structure
- 10.1007/BF02293953 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1986.tb00844.x · DOI
- 10.1080/0022250X.1980.9989895 · DOI
- 10.1137/1028156 · DOI
- 10.1080/01621459.1981.10477598 · DOI
- 10.1080/01621459.1990.10475327 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF02980577 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/01621459.1986.10478342 · DOI
- 10.2307/3213266 · DOI
- 10.2307/1427013 · DOI
- 10.1177/0049124195024001005 · DOI
- Fienberg, 1980, The analysis of cross-classified, categorical data
- Walker, M. E. (1995). Statistical models for social support networks: Application of exponential models to undirected graphs with dyadic dependencies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Department of Psychology.
- 10.1007/BF02294482 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-8733(85)90015-2 · DOI
- Faust, 1992, Centrality and prestige: A review and synthesis, Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 4, 23
- 10.1007/BF02294618 · DOI
- 10.1080/00031305.1992.10475920 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-8733(86)90007-9 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-8733(84)90016-9 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00999.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-352550-5.50010-9 · DOI
- 10.1016/0378-8733(82)90025-9 · DOI
- 10.1080/0022250X.1973.9989825 · DOI
- 10.2307/1426660 · DOI
- 10.1177/004912417800700207 · DOI
- Fienberg, 1981, Sociological methodology 1981, 156
- Vickers, 1981, Relational analysis: An applied evaluation
- 10.1080/01621459.1987.10478385 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Network-based research in entrepreneurship
Hoang, H., & Antoncic, B. (2003) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/s0883-9026(02)00081-2 · Cited by 2,302
Comparing Brain Networks of Different Size and Connectivity Density Using Graph Theory
van Wijk, B. C. M., Stam, C. J., & Daffertshofer, A. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013701 · Cited by 1,161
Activity driven modeling of time varying networks
Perra, N., Gonçalves, B., Pastor-Satorras, R., & Vespignani, A. (2012) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep00469 · Cited by 709
Logit models and logistic regressions for social networks: II. Multivariate relations
Pattison, P., & Wasserman, S. (1999) · British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology · doi:10.1348/000711099159053 · Cited by 327
Self-citationVan den Bulte, C., & Moenaert, R. K. (1998) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.44.11.s1 · Cited by 252
Metadata
- Authors
- Wasserman, S., & Pattison, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois
- University of Melbourne
- Venue
- Psychometrika
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1996-09
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 401-425
- ISSN
- 0033-3123
- 1860-0980
- Cited by
- 950
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review