The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation
Open accessAbstract
Homophily, the tendency of people to associate with others similar to themselves, is observed in many social networks, ranging from friendships to marriages to business relationships, and is based on a variety of characteristics, including race, age, gender, religion, and education. We present a technique for distinguishing two primary sources of homophily: biases in the preferences of individuals over the types of their friends and biases in the chances that people meet individuals of other types. We use this technique to analyze racial patterns in friendship networks in a set of American high schools from the Add Health dataset. Biases in preferences and biases in meeting rates are both highly significant in these data, and both types of biases differ significantly across races. Asians and Blacks are biased toward interacting with their own race at rates >7 times higher than Whites, whereas Hispanics exhibit an intermediate bias in meeting opportunities. Asians exhibit the least preference bias, valuing friendships with other types 90% as much as friendships with Asians, whereas Blacks and Hispanics value friendships with other types 55% and 65% as much as same-type friendships, respectively, and Whites fall in between, valuing other-type friendships 75% as much as friendships with Whites. Meetings are significantly more biased in large schools (>1,000 students) than in small schools (<1,000 students), and biases in preferences exhibit some significant variation with the median household income levels in the counties surrounding the schools.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks
Aral, S., Muchnik, L., & Sundararajan, A. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0908800106 · Cited by 1,207
Cited by
Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks
Aral, S., & Walker, D. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1215842 · Cited by 1,047
Homo Moralis--Preference Evolution Under Incomplete Information and Assortative Matching
(2013) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta10637 · Cited by 371
Exercise contagion in a global social network
Aral, S., & Nicolaides, C. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms14753 · Cited by 329
Shared partisanship dramatically increases social tie formation in a Twitter field experiment
Mosleh, M., Martel, C., Eckles, D., & Rand, D. G. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2022761118 · Cited by 123
Metadata
- Authors
- Currarini, S., Jackson, M. O., & Pin, P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2010-03-08
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 4857-4861
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1986404713
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 56.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0911793107
- The paper
- Currarini, S., Jackson, M. O., & Pin, P. (2010). Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0911793107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.