Agent-Based Models for Assessing Complex Statistical Models: An Example Evaluating Selection and Social Influence Estimates from SIENA.

IF 6.5 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS
Sociological Methods & Research Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2019-04-01 DOI:10.1177/0049124119826147
Sebastian Daza, L Kurt Kreuger
{"title":"Agent-Based Models for Assessing Complex Statistical Models: An Example Evaluating Selection and Social Influence Estimates from SIENA.","authors":"Sebastian Daza, L Kurt Kreuger","doi":"10.1177/0049124119826147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although agent-based models (ABMs) have been increasingly accepted in social sciences as a valid tool to formalize theory, propose mechanisms able to recreate regularities, and guide empirical research, we are not aware of any research using ABMs to assess the robustness of our statistical methods. We argue that ABMs can be extremely helpful to assess models when the phenomena under study are complex. As an example, we create an ABM to evaluate the estimation of selection and influence effects by SIENA, a stochastic actor-oriented model proposed by Tom A. B. Snijders and colleagues. It is a prominent network analysis method that has gained popularity during the last 10 years and been applied to estimate selection and influence for a broad range of behaviors and traits such as substance use, delinquency, violence, health, and educational attainment. However, we know little about the conditions for which this method is reliable or the particular biases it might have. The results from our analysis show that selection and influence are estimated by SIENA asymmetrically and that, with very simple assumptions, we can generate data where selection estimates are highly sensitive to misspecification, suggesting caution when interpreting SIENA analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":21849,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methods & Research","volume":"50 4","pages":"1725-1762"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8491991/pdf/nihms-1021951.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methods & Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124119826147","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although agent-based models (ABMs) have been increasingly accepted in social sciences as a valid tool to formalize theory, propose mechanisms able to recreate regularities, and guide empirical research, we are not aware of any research using ABMs to assess the robustness of our statistical methods. We argue that ABMs can be extremely helpful to assess models when the phenomena under study are complex. As an example, we create an ABM to evaluate the estimation of selection and influence effects by SIENA, a stochastic actor-oriented model proposed by Tom A. B. Snijders and colleagues. It is a prominent network analysis method that has gained popularity during the last 10 years and been applied to estimate selection and influence for a broad range of behaviors and traits such as substance use, delinquency, violence, health, and educational attainment. However, we know little about the conditions for which this method is reliable or the particular biases it might have. The results from our analysis show that selection and influence are estimated by SIENA asymmetrically and that, with very simple assumptions, we can generate data where selection estimates are highly sensitive to misspecification, suggesting caution when interpreting SIENA analyses.

评估复杂统计模型的基于主体的模型:一个评估SIENA选择和社会影响估计的例子。
尽管基于主体的模型(ABM)在社会科学中越来越被接受为一种有效的工具,可以将理论形式化,提出能够重现规律的机制,并指导实证研究,但我们不知道有任何研究使用ABM来评估我们统计方法的稳健性。我们认为,当所研究的现象很复杂时,ABM对评估模型非常有帮助。例如,我们创建了一个ABM来评估SIENA对选择和影响效应的估计,SIENA是Tom a.B.Snijders及其同事提出的一个面向参与者的随机模型。这是一种突出的网络分析方法,在过去10年中广受欢迎,并被应用于评估广泛行为和特征的选择和影响,如药物使用、犯罪、暴力、健康和教育程度。然而,我们对这种方法可靠的条件或可能存在的特定偏差知之甚少。我们的分析结果表明,选择和影响是由SIENA不对称估计的,通过非常简单的假设,我们可以生成选择估计对错误指定高度敏感的数据,这表明在解释SIENA分析时要谨慎。
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
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Sociological Methods & Research is a quarterly journal devoted to sociology as a cumulative empirical science. The objectives of SMR are multiple, but emphasis is placed on articles that advance the understanding of the field through systematic presentations that clarify methodological problems and assist in ordering the known facts in an area. Review articles will be published, particularly those that emphasize a critical analysis of the status of the arts, but original presentations that are broadly based and provide new research will also be published. Intrinsically, SMR is viewed as substantive journal but one that is highly focused on the assessment of the scientific status of sociology. The scope is broad and flexible, and authors are invited to correspond with the editors about the appropriateness of their articles.
×
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