The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
8. Comparing Networks across Space and Time, Size and Species
Abstract
We describe and illustrate methodology for comparing networks from diverse settings. Our empirical base consists of 42 networks from four kinds of species (humans, nonhuman primates, nonprimate mammals, and birds) and covering distinct types of relations such as influence, grooming, and agonistic encounters. The general problem is to determine whether networks are similarly structured despite their surface differences. The methodology we propose is generally applicable to the characterization and comparison of network-level social structures across multiple settings, such as different organizations, communities, or social groups, and to the examination of sources of variability in network structure. We first fit a p* model (Wasserman and Pattison 1996) to each network to obtain estimates for effects of six structural properties on the probability of the graph. We then calculate predicted tie probabilities for each network, using both its own parameter estimates and the estimates from every other network in the collection. Comparison is based on the similarity between sets of predicted tie probabilities. We then use correspondence analysis to represent the similarities among all 42 networks and interpret the resulting configuration using information about the species and relations involved. Results show that similarities among the networks are due more to the kind of relation than to the kind of animal.
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
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Self-citation
Cited by
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
Neumeyer, X., & Santos, S. C. (2018) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.216 · Cited by 299
Social networking in the Columbian ground squirrel, Spermophilus columbianus
Manno, T. G. (2008) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.09.025 · Cited by 96
Social network analysis and terrorism
Malm, A., Nash, R., & Moghadam, R. (2016) · The Handbook of the Criminology of Terrorism · doi:10.1002/9781118923986.ch14 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Faust, K., & Skvoretz, J.
- Venue
- Sociological Methodology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-08
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 267-299
- ISSN
- 0081-1750 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9531
- OpenAlex
- W2093033099
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.