Assessing the stability of egocentric networks over time using the digital participant-aided sociogram tool Network Canvas.

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Network Science Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Epub Date: 2019-11-04 DOI:10.1017/nws.2019.27
Bernie Hogan, Patrick Janulis, Gregory Lee Phillips, Joshua Melville, Brian Mustanski, Noshir Contractor, Michelle Birkett
{"title":"Assessing the stability of egocentric networks over time using the digital participant-aided sociogram tool Network Canvas.","authors":"Bernie Hogan,&nbsp;Patrick Janulis,&nbsp;Gregory Lee Phillips,&nbsp;Joshua Melville,&nbsp;Brian Mustanski,&nbsp;Noshir Contractor,&nbsp;Michelle Birkett","doi":"10.1017/nws.2019.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper examines the stability of egocentric networks as reported over time using a novel touchscreen-based participant-aided sociogram. Past work has noted the instability of nominated network alters, with a large proportion leaving and reappearing between interview observations. To explain this instability of networks over time, researchers often look to structural embeddedness, namely the notion that alters are connected to other alters within egocentric networks. Recent research has also asked whether the interview situation itself may play a role in conditioning respondents to what might be the appropriate size and shape of a social network, and thereby which alters ought to be nominated or not. We report on change in these networks across three waves and assess whether this change appears to be the result of natural churn in the network or whether changes might be the result of factors in the interview itself, particularly anchoring and motivated underreporting. Our results indicate little change in average network size across waves, particularly for indirect tie nominations. Slight, significant changes were noted between waves one and two particularly among those with the largest networks. Almost no significant differences were observed between waves two and three, either in terms of network size, composition, or density. Data come from three waves of a Chicago-based panel study of young men who have sex with men.</p>","PeriodicalId":51827,"journal":{"name":"Network Science","volume":"8 2","pages":"204-222"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/nws.2019.27","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Network Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/nws.2019.27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/11/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

This paper examines the stability of egocentric networks as reported over time using a novel touchscreen-based participant-aided sociogram. Past work has noted the instability of nominated network alters, with a large proportion leaving and reappearing between interview observations. To explain this instability of networks over time, researchers often look to structural embeddedness, namely the notion that alters are connected to other alters within egocentric networks. Recent research has also asked whether the interview situation itself may play a role in conditioning respondents to what might be the appropriate size and shape of a social network, and thereby which alters ought to be nominated or not. We report on change in these networks across three waves and assess whether this change appears to be the result of natural churn in the network or whether changes might be the result of factors in the interview itself, particularly anchoring and motivated underreporting. Our results indicate little change in average network size across waves, particularly for indirect tie nominations. Slight, significant changes were noted between waves one and two particularly among those with the largest networks. Almost no significant differences were observed between waves two and three, either in terms of network size, composition, or density. Data come from three waves of a Chicago-based panel study of young men who have sex with men.

使用数字参与者辅助社交工具网络画布评估自我中心网络随时间的稳定性。
本文使用一种新颖的基于触摸屏的参与者辅助社交图来研究自我中心网络的稳定性。过去的工作已经注意到被提名的网络改变者的不稳定性,在采访观察之间有很大比例的离开和重新出现。为了解释这种网络随时间的不稳定性,研究人员经常关注结构嵌入性,即在以自我为中心的网络中,改变者与其他改变者联系在一起的概念。最近的研究还提出了这样一个问题:面试情境本身是否会影响受访者对社交网络的适当大小和形状的判断,从而决定哪些变化应该被提名。我们报告了这些网络中的变化,并评估这种变化是网络中自然流失的结果,还是面谈本身因素的结果,特别是锚定和动机性低报。我们的研究结果表明,跨波的平均网络规模变化不大,特别是对于间接领带提名。在第一波和第二波之间发现了轻微的、显著的变化,尤其是那些拥有最大神经网络的人。在第二波和第三波之间,无论是在网络大小、组成还是密度方面,几乎没有观察到显著的差异。数据来自芝加哥一项针对男男性行为的年轻男性的三波小组研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Network Science
Network Science SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Network Science is an important journal for an important discipline - one using the network paradigm, focusing on actors and relational linkages, to inform research, methodology, and applications from many fields across the natural, social, engineering and informational sciences. Given growing understanding of the interconnectedness and globalization of the world, network methods are an increasingly recognized way to research aspects of modern society along with the individuals, organizations, and other actors within it. The discipline is ready for a comprehensive journal, open to papers from all relevant areas. Network Science is a defining work, shaping this discipline. The journal welcomes contributions from researchers in all areas working on network theory, methods, and data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信