Quality & Quantity

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 563–575 | Cite as

Examining the international internet using multiple measures: new methods for measuring the communication base of globalized cyberspace

Article

Abstract

This article examines the network structure of the international internet using four different sources of data: (1) bilateral bandwidth between countries; (2) hyperlink connections among nations’ domain names; (3) structural equivalence of nations from the perspective of websites, measured by the percentage of specific websites’ traffic from individual countries; and (4) structural equivalence of nations from the national perspective, using the proportion of a country’s 100 most-visited websites shared with other countries. Results indicate that the international internet network appears to consist of series of small worlds determined by language, geography, and historical circumstances. Therefore, one cannot depict the internet only through an examination of the hyperlink connections among nations. There is a need for multiple indicators to accurately describe the global internet.

Keywords

Multiple measures International internet structure Bandwidth Hyperlink network National website traffic 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barabási A.: Linked: The New Science of Networks. Perseus, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  2. Barnett G.A., Park H.W.: The structure of international internet hyperlinks and bilateral bandwidth. Ann. Telecommun. 60, 1115–1132 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. Barnett G.A., Chon B.S., Rosen D.: The structure of international internet flows in cyberspace. Netw. Commun. Stud. (NETCOM) 15(1–2), 61–80 (2001)Google Scholar
  4. Barnett G.A., Chung C.J., Park H.W.: Uncovering transnational hyperlink patterns and web-mediated contents: a new approach based on cracking .com domain. Soc. Sci. Comput. Res. Eval. (SSCORE) 29(3), 369–384 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgatti S.P., Everett M.G., Freeman L.C.: UCINET for windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, Harvard (2002)Google Scholar
  6. Borgatti S.P.: Netdraw Network Visualization. Analytic Technologies, Harvard (2005)Google Scholar
  7. Carley, K. M.: On the evolution of social and organizational networks. In Knoke, D., Andrews, S.B. (eds.) Networks in and Around Organizations. JAI Press, Greenwich (1999)Google Scholar
  8. Chakrabarti S., Dom B.E., Kumar S.R., Raghavan P., Rajagopalan S., Stata R., Tomkins A., Gibson D., Kleinberg J.: Mining the web’s link structure. Computer 32, 60–67 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Esposito M., Zaccarin S.: Editorial: applied and methodological issues in the analysis of network data. Qual. Quant. 45, 985–987 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dekker D., Krackhardt D., Snijders T.A.B.: Sensitivity of MRQAP test to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika 72(4), 563–581 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dodge M., Zook M.: Internet-based measurement. In: Kitchin, R., Thrift, N. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Elsevier, Oxford (2009)Google Scholar
  12. Doreian P.A.: Multiple indicator approach to blockmodeling signed networks. Soc. Netw. 30, 247–258 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartman R.L., Johnson J.D.: Social contagion and multiplexity: communication networks as predictors of commitment and role ambiguity. Human Commun. Res. 15, 523–548 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hsu C.-L., Park H.W.: Sociology of hyperlink networks of web 1.0, web 2.0, and twitter: a case study of South Korea. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 29(3), 354–368 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kleinberg J., Lawrence S.: The structure of the web. Science 294, 1849–1850 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Monge P.R., Contractor N.S.: Theories of Communication Networks. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)Google Scholar
  17. Park H.W.: How do social scientists use link data from search engines to understand internet-based political and electoral communication. Qual. Quant. 46(2), 679–693 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Park H.W., Barnett G.A., Chung C.J.: Structural changes in the global hyperlink network 2003–2009. Glob. Netw. 11(4), 522–544 (2011a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Park S.J., Lim Y.S., Sams S., Sang M.N., Park H.W.: Networked politics on cyworld: the text and sentiment of korean political profiles. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 29(3), 288–299 (2011b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Park H.W., Kim C.S., Barnett G.A.: Socio-communicational structure among political actors on the web. New Media Soc. 6(3), 403–423 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rosen D., Barnett G.A., Kim J.H.: Social networks and online environments: when science and practice co-evolve. Soc. Netw. Min. 1, 27–42 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shumate M., Lipp J.: Connective collective action online: an examination of the hyperlink network structure of an NGO issue network. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 14, 178–201 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. TeleGeography.: Global Internet Geography. TeleGeography, Inc., Washington, DC http://www.telegeography.com/research-services/global-internet-geography/ (2011)
  24. Thelwall M.: Introduction to Webometrics. Morgan & Claypool, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  25. Weber M.S., Monge P.R.: The flow of digital news in a network of sources, authorities, and hubs. J. Commun. 61, 1062–1081 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zook M., Devriendt L., Dodge M.: Cyberspatial proximity metrics: conceptualizing distance in the global urban system. J. Urban Technol. 18(1), 11–93 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CommunicationUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Media and CommunicationCyber Emotions Research Institute, Yeungnam UniversityGyeongsanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations