Advertisement

Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 23, Issue 6, pp 1715–1726 | Cite as

Discovering Homophily in Online Social Networks

  • Andrea De Salve
  • Barbara Guidi
  • Laura Ricci
  • Paolo Mori
Article
  • 71 Downloads

Abstract

During the last ten years, Online Social Networks (OSNs) have increased their popularity by becoming part of the real life of users. Despite their tremendous widespread, OSNs have introduced several privacy issues as a consequence of the nature of the information involved in these services. Indeed, the huge amount of private information produced by users of current OSNs expose the users to a number of risks. The analysis of the users’ similarity in OSNs is attracting the attention of researchers because of its implications on privacy and social marketing. In particular, the homophily between users could be used to reveal important characteristics that users would like to keep hidden, hence violating the privacy of OSNs’ users. Homophily has been well studied in existing sociology literature, however, it is not easily extensible in OSNs due to the lack of real datasets. In this paper, we propose an analysis of similarity of social profiles in terms of movie preferences. Results reveal the presence of homophily between users and its dependence from the tie strength. Moreover, we show that it is possible to profile a user (in our case by considering the age attribute) by exploiting movie preferences.

Keywords

Online Social Networks Homophily Privacy preserving Viral marketing User profiling 

References

  1. 1.
    Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A, Pezzoni F (2012) Analysis of ego network structure in online social networks. In: Privacy, security, risk and trust (PASSAT), 2012 international conference on and 2012 international confernece on social computing (SocialCom). IEEE, pp 31–40Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A, Pezzoni F (2013) Ego networks in twitter: an experimental analysis. In: 2013 IEEE conference on computer communications workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS), pp 229–234Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balduzzi M, Platzer C, Holz T, Kirda E, Balzarotti D, Kruegel C (2010) Abusing social networks for automated user profiling. In: Recent advances in intrusion detection, pp 422–441Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bischoff K (2012) We love rock ‘n’ roll: Analyzing and predicting friendship links in last.fm. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual ACM web science conference, WebSci ’12, pp 47–56Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bisgin H, Agarwal N, Xu X (2010) Investigating homophily in online social networks. In: Web intelligence and intelligent agent technology (WI-IAT), 2010, vol 1, pp 533–536Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boyd D, Ellison NB (2007) Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J Comput-Mediat Commun 13(1):210–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carullo G, Castiglione A, De Santis A, Palmieri F (2015) A triadic closure and homophily-based recommendation system for online social networks. World Wide Web 18(6):1579–1601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Conti M, De Salve A, Guidi B, Pitto F, Ricci L (2014) Trusted dynamic storage for dunbar-based P2P online social networks. In: On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2014 conferences, pp 400–417Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crandall D, Cosley D, Huttenlocher D, Kleinberg J, Suri S (2008) Feedback effects between similarity and social influence in online communities. In: International conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, KDD ’08, pp 160–168Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Datta A, Buchegger S, Vu LH, Strufe T, Rzadca K (2010) Decentralized online social networks. In: Handbook of social network technologies and applications, pp 349–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Choudhury M (2011) Tie formation on twitter: homophily and structure of egocentric networks. In: IEEE third international conference on privacy, security, risk and trust (PASSAT) and 2011 IEEE third international conference on social computing (SocialCom). IEEE, pp 465–470Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Salve A, Dondio M, Guidi B, Ricci L (2016) The impact of user’s availability on on-line ego networks: a facebook analysis. Comput Commun 73:211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Salve A, Guidi B, Ricci L (2017a) Analysis of users behaviour from a movie preferences perspective. In: 3rd EAI international conference on smart objects and technologies for social goodGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Salve A, Mori P, Ricci L (2017b) Evaluating the impact of friends in predicting user’s availability in online social networks. In: International workshop on personal analytics and privacy. Springer, Berlin, pp 51–63Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dunbar R (1998) The social brain hypothesis. Brain 9(10):178–190Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dunbar RI, Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A (2015) The structure of online social networks mirrors those in the offline world. Soc Netw 43:39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Everett M, Borgatti SP (2005) Ego network betweenness. Soc Netw 27(1):31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gao H, Hu J, Huang T, Wang J, Chen Y (2011) Security issues in online social networks. IEEE Internet Comput 15(4):56–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guidi B, Conti M, Ricci L (2013) P2p architectures for distributed online social networks. In: 2013 International conference on high performance computing and simulation (HPCS). IEEE, pp 678–681Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guidi B, Amft T, De Salve A, Graffi K, Ricci L (2015) Didusonet: a p2p architecture for distributed dunbar-based social networks. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, pp 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hill RA, Dunbar RI (2003) Social network size in humans. Hum Nat 14(1):53–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kontaxis G, Polakis I, Ioannidis S (2011) Markatos EP. Detecting social network profile cloning, 2011 IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and communications workshops (PERCOM Workshops), pp 295–300Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lazarsfeld PF, Merton RK (1954) Friendship as a social process: a substantive and methodological analysis. In: Freedom and control in modern society, New York, pp 18–66Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    MacQueen J et al (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, vol 1, pp 281–297Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol 27(1):415– 444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mislove A, Viswanath B, Gummadi KP, Druschel P (2010) You are who you know: inferring user profiles in online social networks. In: Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining, pp 251–260Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ruan X, Yue C, Wang H (2013) Unveiling privacy setting breaches in online social networks. Springer International Publishing, pp 323–341Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Şimşek Ö, Jensen D (2008) Navigating networks by using homophily and degree. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(35):12758– 12762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tang J, Gao H, Hu X, Liu H (2013) Exploiting homophily effect for trust prediction. In: Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. ACM, pp 53–62Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang D, Pedreschi D, Song C, Giannotti F (2011) Barabasi AL. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, pp 1100–1108Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xie J, Kelley S, Szymanski BK (2013) Overlapping community detection in networks: the state-of-the-art and comparative study. ACM Comput Surv 45(4):431–4335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang C, Lu T, Chen S, Zhang C (2017) Integrating ego, homophily, and structural factors to measure user influence in online community. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 60(3):292–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Informatics and TelematicsNational Research CouncilPisaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations