Social network analysis is increasingly applied to understand the evolution of animal sociality. Identifying ecological and evolutionary drivers of complex social structures requires inferring how social networks change over time. In most observational studies, sampling errors may affect the apparent network structures. Here, we argue that existing approaches tend not to control sufficiently for some types of sampling errors when social networks change over time. Specifically, we argue that two different types of changes may occur in social networks, heterogeneous and homogeneous changes, and that understanding network dynamics requires distinguishing between these two different types of changes, which are not mutually exclusive. Heterogeneous changes occur if relationships change differentially, e.g., if some relationships are terminated but others remain intact. Homogeneous changes occur if all relationships are proportionally affected in the same way, e.g., if grooming rates decline similarly across all dyads. Homogeneous declines in the strength of relationships can strongly reduce the probability of observing weak relationships, producing the appearance of heterogeneous network changes. Using simulations, we confirm that failing to differentiate homogeneous and heterogeneous changes can potentially lead to false conclusions about network dynamics. We also show that bootstrap tests fail to distinguish between homogeneous and heterogeneous changes. As a solution to this problem, we show that an appropriate randomization test can infer whether heterogeneous changes occurred. Finally, we illustrate the utility of using the randomization test by performing an example analysis using an empirical data set on wild baboons.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–267
Ansmann IC, Parra GJ, Chilvers BL, Lanyon JM (2012) Dolphins restructure social system after reduction of commercial fisheries. Anim Behav 84:575–581
Barrett L, Henzi SP, Lusseau D (2012) Taking sociality seriously: the structure of multi-dimensional social networks as a source of information for individuals. Philos T Roy Soc B 367:2108–2118
Bejder L, Fletcher D, Bräger S (1998) A method for testing association patterns of social animals. Anim Behav 56:719–725
Blonder B, Wey TW, Dornhaus A, James R, Sih A (2012) Temporal dynamics and network analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 3:958–972
Boogert NJ, Farine DR, Spencer KA (2014) Developmental stress predicts social network position. Biol Lett 10:20140561
Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) Ucinet for windows: software for social network analysis, https://sites.google.com/site/ucinetsoftware/home
Brent LJN, MacLarnon A, Platt ML, Semple S (2013) Seasonal changes in the structure of rhesus macaque social networks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:349–359
Cantor M, Wedekin LL, Guimaraes PR, Daura-Jorge FG, Rossi-Santos MR, Simoes-Lopes PC (2012) Disentangling social networks from spatiotemporal dynamics: the temporal structure of a dolphin society. Anim Behav 84:641–651
Croft DP, James R, Krause J (2008) Exploring animal social networks. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Croft DP, Madden JR, Franks DW, James R (2011) Hypothesis testing in animal social networks. Trends Ecol Evol 26:502–507
Csardi G, Nepusz T (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. Int J Complex Syst 1695:1–9, http://igraph.org
Farine DR, Whitehead H (2015) Constructing, conducting and interpreting animal social network analysis. J Anim Ecol 84:1144–1163
Flack JC, Krakauer DC, de Waal FBM (2005) Robustness mechanisms in primate societies: a perturbation study. Proc R Soc Lond B 272:1091–1099
Flack JC, Girvan M, de Waal FBM, Krakauer DC (2006) Policing stabilizes construction of social niches in primates. Nature 439:426–429
Foster EA, Franks DW, Morrell LJ, Balcomb KC, Parsons KM, van Ginneken A, Croft DP (2012) Social network correlates of food availability in an endangered population of killer whales, Orcinus orca. Anim Behav 83:731–736
Franz M, Altmann J, Alberts SC (2015) Knockouts of high-ranking males have limited impact on baboon social networks. Curr Zool 61:107–113
Gero S, Gordon J, Whitehead H (2013) Calves as social hubs: dynamics of the social network within sperm whale units. Proc R Soc B 280:20131113
Hansen H, McDonald DB, Groves P, Maier JAK, Ben-David M (2009) Social networks and the formation and maintenance of river otter groups. Ethology 115:384–396
Henzi SP, Lusseau D, Weingrill T, van Schaik CP, Barrett L (2009) Cyclicity in the structure of female baboon social networks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1015–1021
Hobson EA, Avery ML, Wright TF (2013) An analytical framework for quantifying and testing patterns of temporal dynamics in social networks. Anim Behav 85:83–96
James R, Croft DP, Krause J (2009) Potential banana skins in animal social network analysis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:989–997
Krause J, Lusseau D, James R (2009) Animal social networks: an introduction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:967–973
Lusseau D, Whitehead H, Gero S (2008) Incorporating uncertainty into the study of animal social networks. Anim Behav 75:1809–1815
Pinter-Wollman N, Hobson EA, Smith E et al (2014) The dynamics of animal social networks: analytical, conceptual, and theoretical advances. Behav Ecol 25:242–255
R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, https://www.r-project.org
Robins G, Pattison P, Kalish Y, Lusher D (2007) An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Soc Netw 29:173–191
Snijders TA, Van de Bunt GG, Steglich CE (2010) Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc Networks 32:44–60
Sueur C, Jacobs A, Amblard F, Petit O, King AJ (2011) How can social network analysis improve the study of primate behavior? Am J Primatol 73:703–719
Voelkl B, Kasper C, Schwab C (2011) Network measures for dyadic interactions: stability and reliability. Am J Primatol 73:731–740
Wey T, Blumstein DT, Shen W, Jordan F (2008) Social network analysis of animal behaviour: a promising tool for the study of sociality. Anim Behav 75:333–344
Whitehead H (2008) Analyzing animal societies: quantitative methods for vertebrate social analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Whitehead H, Bejder L, Andrea Ottensmeyer C (2005) Testing association patterns: issues arising and extensions. Anim Behav 69:e1
Wilson AD, Krause S, James R, Croft DP, Ramnarine IW, Borner KK, Clement RJ, Krause J (2014) Dynamic social networks in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:915–925
Wittemyer G, Douglas-Hamilton I, Getz WM (2005) The socioecology of elephants: analysis of the processes creating multitiered social structures. Anim Behav 69:1357–1371
We thank two anonymous reviewers, Damien Farine, Daniel van der Post, and Emily McLean, for helpful suggestions and discussion. We thank the Kenya Wildlife Services, Institute of Primate Research, National Museums of Kenya, National Council for Science and Technology, members of the Amboseli-Longido pastoralist communities, Tortillis Camp, Ker & Downey Safaris, Air Kenya, and Safarilink for their cooperation and assistance in Kenya. Thanks also to R.S. Mututua, S. Sayialel, J.K. Warutere, V. Somen, and T. Wango in Kenya, and to J. Altmann, K. Pinc, N. Learn, L. Maryott, and J. Gordon in the US. This research was approved by the IACUC at Princeton University and at Duke University and adhered to all the laws and guidelines of Kenya.
The National Science Foundation (most recently BCS 0323553, DEB 0846286, and IOS 0919200) and the National Institute on Aging (R01AG034513 and P01AG031719) for the majority of the data presented here. M. Franz was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and by Duke University.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted.
Communicated by D. P. Croft
About this article
Cite this article
Franz, M., Alberts, S.C. Social network dynamics: the importance of distinguishing between heterogeneous and homogeneous changes. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 69, 2059–2069 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-2030-x
- Social networks
- Social network analysis
- Social network dynamics
- Sampling errors