A note on inferences regarding network subgroups☆
References (4)
- et al.
Informant accuracy in social network data IV: a comparison of clique-level structure in behavioral and cognitive network data
Social Networks
(1980) - et al.
Informant accuracy in social network data II
Human Communication Research
(1977)
Cited by (34)
Revisiting the accuracy problem in network analysis using a unique dataset
2021, Social NetworksA Network Bidder Behavior Model in Online Auctions: A Case of Fine Art Auctions
2014, Journal of RetailingCitation Excerpt :Even though the ties represent fundamental dyadic interactions (e.g., Krackhardt and Kilduff 2002), the matrices typically reveal concentrated groups of actors interacting with each other, certainly well beyond statistical randomness (Barabási and Albert 1999; Bonacich 1972). The challenge in network theory is to analyze the data properly, taking into account the inter-dependence among the nodes, vis-à-vis the linkages (Burt and Bittner 1981). To illustrate the network concepts in the auction context, consider the bidding process depicted in Fig. 1.
Distance and cosine measures of niche overlap
2001, Social NetworksCognitive inconsistencies and non-symmetric friendship
1996, Social NetworksPatterns in the recall of persons in a religious community
1994, Social Networks
- ☆
As part of the ongoing work under the Project in Structural Analysis at the Survey Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, work on this note was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (SOC77-22938 and SOC79-25728). The data analysis was accomplished during a leave of absence the senior author spent in the Department of Sociology, State University of New York at Albany where the junior author is currently a graduate student.