Identifying statistically significant edges in one-mode projections

Social Network Analysis and Mining volume 3, pages915–924(2013)Cite this article

Abstract

One-mode projections of two-mode data are typically valued, and therefore, require dichotomization before they can be analyzed using many network analytic methods. The traditional dichotomization approach, in which a universal threshold is applied to all edge weights, can yield a binary one-mode projection with undesirable artifacts and requires the arbitrary selection of a threshold value. This paper proposes a method and associated Stata command, ONEMODE, for identifying statistically significant edges in one-mode projections, which can be used to construct both binary and signed projections. The method is demonstrated using two-mode data on southern women’s social event participation and US Supreme Court justices’ majority decision participation, and is compared to two alternative approaches for normalizing edge weights in one-mode projections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. 1.

    Throughout this paper, I use the somewhat liberal α = 0.10 for the purposes of illustration; in practice, a more conservative α-level may be more appropriate.

  2. 2.

    Avoidance of co-participation does not necessarily imply animosity. For example, two friends seeking to break into a social scene might adopt a divide-and-conquer strategy in which they purposefully attend separate social events to maximize exposure.

  3. 3.

    According to Davis et al. (1941), clique 1 included a core (Evelyn, Laura, Theresa, and Brenda), primary members (Charlotte, Francis, and Eleanor), and a secondary member (Pearl). Likewise, clique 2 included a core (Sylvia, Nora, and Helen), primary members (Myrna and Katherine), and secondary members (Ruth, Verne, Dorothy, Olivia, and Flora).

  4. 4.

    Comparing these normalizations to the proposed method using the Deep South data yields similar results.

References

  1. Abdallah S (2011) Generalizing unweighted network measures to capture the focus in interactions. Soc Netw Anal Mining 1:255–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bonacich P (1972) Technique for analyzing overlapping group memberships. Sociol Methodol 4:176–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Borgatti SP, Everett MG (1997) Network analysis of 2-mode data. Soc Netw 19:243–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Borgatti SP, Halgin DS (2011) Analyzing affiliation networks. pp 417–434 in The Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis. In: Scott J, Carrington PJ (eds) Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

  5. Breiger RL (1974) The duality of persons and groups. Soc Forces 53:181–190

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cartwright D, Harary F (1956) Structural balance: a generalization of Heider’s theory. Psychol Rev 63:277–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Davis A, Gardner BG, Gardner MR (1941) Deep South: a social anthropological study of caste and class. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  8. Doreian P, Batagelj V, Ferligoj A (2004) Generalized blockmodeling of two-mode network data. Soc Netw 26:29–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Feld SL (1981) The focused organization of social ties. Am J Sociol 86:1015–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Field S, Frank KA, Schiller K, Riegle-Crumb C, Muller C (2006) Identifying positions from affiliation networks: preserving the duality of people and events. Soc Netw 28:97–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fowler JH (2006) Legislative cosponsorship networks in the US house and senate. Soc Netw 28:454–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Freeman LC (1992) The sociological concept of “group”: An empirical test of two models. Am J Sociol 98:152–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Heider F (1946) Attitudes and cognitive organization. J Psychol 21:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Latapy M, Magnien C, Del Vecchio N (2008) Basic notions for the analysis of large two-mode networks. Soc Netw 30:31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mizruchi MS (1996) What do interlocks do? An analysis, critique, and assessment of research on interlocking directorates. Ann Rev Sociol 22:271–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mrvar A, Doreian P (2009) Partitioning signed two-mode networks. J Math Sociol 33:196–221

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Neal Z (2012) Structural determinism in the interlocking world city network. Geogr Anal 44:162–170

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Neal Z (in press) Brute force and sorting processes: two perspectives on world city network formation. Urban Studies. doi:10.1177/0042098012460733

  19. Newman MEJ (2004) Analysis of weighted networks. Phys Rev E 70: 056131

    Google Scholar 

  20. Raeder T, Chawla NV (2011) Market basket analysis with networks. Soc Netw Anal Mining 1:97–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Simmel G (1955) The web of group affiliations. pp 125–195 in Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations, transl. Reinhard Bendix. The Free Press, Glencoe, IL

  22. Sharara H, Singh L, Getoor L, Mann J (2011) Understanding actor loyalty to event-based groups in affiliation networks. Soc Netw Anal Mining 1:115–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor P (2001) Specification of the world city network. Geogr Anal 33:181–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Taylor PJ, Catalano G (2000) GaWC dataset 11. Retrieved on 31 May 2012 from http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/datasets/da11.html

  25. Watts DJ (2003) Six Degrees: the science of a connected age. W. W. Norton, New York

  26. Zweig KA, Kaufmann M (2011) A systematic approach to the one-mode projection of bipartite graphs. Soc Netw Anal Mining 1:187–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Sociology Department, 316 Berkey Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1111, USA

    Zachary Neal

Authors
  1. Zachary Neal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zachary Neal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neal, Z. Identifying statistically significant edges in one-mode projections. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 3, 915–924 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-013-0107-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Bipartite
  • Dichotomize
  • One-mode projection
  • Signed network
  • Two-mode