Advertisement

Network-based intervention strategies to reduce violence among homeless

  • Ajitesh SrivastavaEmail author
  • Robin Petering
  • Nicholas Barr
  • Rajgopal Kannan
  • Eric Rice
  • Viktor K. Prasanna
Original Article

Abstract

Violence is a phenomenon that severely impacts homeless youth who are at an increased risk of experiencing it as a result of many contributing factors such as traumatic childhood experiences, involvement in delinquent activities, and exposure to perpetrators due to street tenure. Reducing violence in this population is necessary to ensure that the individuals can safely and successfully exit homelessness and lead a long productive life. Interventions to reduce violence in this population are difficult to implement due to the complex nature of violence. However, a peer-based intervention approach would likely be a worthy approach as previous research has shown that individuals who interact with more violent individuals are more likely to be violent, suggesting a contagious nature of violence. We propose uncertain voter model to represent the complex process of diffusion of violence over a social network that captures uncertainties in links and time over which the diffusion of violence takes place. Assuming this model, we define violence minimization problem where the task is to select a predefined number of individuals for intervention so that the expected number of violent individuals in the network is minimized over a given time frame. We also extend the problem to a probabilistic setting, where the success probability of converting an individual into nonviolent is a function of the number of “units” of intervention performed on them. We provide algorithms for finding the optimal intervention strategies for both scenarios. We demonstrate that our algorithms perform significantly better than interventions based on popular centrality measures in terms of reducing violence. Finally, we use our optimal algorithm for probabilistic intervention to recruit peers in a homeless youth shelter as a pilot study. Our surveys before and after the intervention show a significant reduction in violence.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by US National Science Foundation under EAGER Award Number 1637372.

References

  1. Baer RA, Smith GT, Lykins E, Button D, Krietemeyer J, Sauer S, Walsh E, Duggan D, Williams JMG (2008) Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment 15(3):329–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, Bergen CountyGoogle Scholar
  3. Bronfenbrenner U (1977) Toward an experimental ecology of human development. Am Psychol 32(7):513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Catalano RF, Berglund ML, Ryan JA, Lonczak HS, Hawkins JD (2004) Positive youth development in the united states: research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 591(1):98–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duong J, Bradshaw C (2014) Associations between bullying and engaging in aggressive and suicidal behaviors among sexual minority youth: the moderating role of connectedness. J School Health 84(10):636–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eaton DK, Kann L, Kinchen S, Shanklin S, Flint KH, Hawkins J, Harris WA, Lowry R, McManus T, Chyen D, et al. (2012a) Youth risk behavior surveillance-united states, 2011. Morbidity and mortality weekly report surveillance summaries (Washington, DC: 2002) 61(4):1–162Google Scholar
  7. Eaton LA, Kalichman SC, Sikkema KJ, Skinner D, Watt MH, Pieterse D, Pitpitan EV (2012b) Pregnancy, alcohol intake, and intimate partner violence among men and women attending drinking establishments in a cape town, south africa township. J Commun Health 37(1):208–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Even-Dar E, Shapira A (2007) A note on maximizing the spread of influence in social networks. In: International workshop on web and internet economics, Springer, Berlin, pp 281–286Google Scholar
  9. Fagan J, Wilkinson DL, Davies G (2007) Social contagion of violence. In: DJ Flannery, AT Vazsonyi, ID Waldman (eds) The cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression, cambridge handbooks in psychology, pp 688–724Google Scholar
  10. Heerde JA, Hemphill SA, Scholes-Balog KE (2014) ‘Fighting’ for survival: a systematic review of physically violent behavior perpetrated and experienced by homeless young people. Aggress Violent Behav 19(1):50–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holley RA, Liggett TM et al (1975) Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model. Ann Probab 3(4):643–663MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kann L, Kinchen S, Shanklin SL, Flint KH, Hawkins J, Harris WA, Lowry R, Olsen EO, McManus T, Chyen D, et al. (2014) Youth risk behavior surveillance—united states, 2013Google Scholar
  13. Kempe D, Kleinberg J, Tardos É (2003) Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, pp 137–146Google Scholar
  14. Leskovec J, Chakrabarti D, Kleinberg J, Faloutsos C, Ghahramani Z (2010) Kronecker graphs: an approach to modeling networks. J Mach Learn Res 11(Feb):985–1042MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Liben-Nowell D, Kleinberg J (2007) The link-prediction problem for social networks. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 58(7):1019–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lü L, Zhou T (2011) Link prediction in complex networks: a survey. Physica A: Stat Mech Appl 390(6):1150–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Myers DJ (2000) The diffusion of collective violence: infectiousness, susceptibility, and mass media networks 1. Am J Sociol 106(1):173–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Myers DJ, Oliver PE (2008) The opposing forces diffusion model: the initiation and repression of collective violence. Dyn Asymmetr Confl 1(2):164–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. of Justice D (2013) Office of victims of crime. 2013 National crime victims’ rights week resource guide: section 6 statistical overviewsGoogle Scholar
  20. Petering R, Rice E, Rhoades H, Winetrobe H (2014) The social networks of homeless youth experiencing intimate partner violence. J Interpers Violence 29(12):2172–2191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prakash BA, Adamic L, Iwashyna T, Tong H, Faloutsos C (2013) Fractional immunization in networks. In: Proceedings of the 2013 SIAM international conference on data mining. SIAM, pp 659–667Google Scholar
  22. Rice E, Holloway IW, Barman-Adhikari A, Fuentes D, Brown CH, Palinkas LA (2014) A mixed methods approach to network data collection. Field Methods 26(3):252–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shakarian P, Salmento J, Pulleyblank W, Bertetto J (2014) Reducing gang violence through network influence based targeting of social programs. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, pp 1829–1836Google Scholar
  24. Soma T, Yoshida Y (2016) Maximizing monotone submodular functions over the integer lattice. In: International conference on integer programming and combinatorial optimization. Springer, pp 325–336Google Scholar
  25. Srivastava A, Petering R, Kannan R, Rice E, Prasanna VK (2018) How to stop violence among homeless: extension of voter model and intervention strategies. In: 2018 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (ASONAM). IEEE, pp 83–86Google Scholar
  26. Tang Y, Shi Y, Xiao X (2015) Influence maximization in near-linear time: a martingale approach. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data. ACM, pp 1539–1554Google Scholar
  27. Terry MJ, Bedi G, Patel ND (2010) Healthcare needs of homeless youth in the united states. J Pediatr Sci 2(1):e17–e28Google Scholar
  28. Valente TW (2012) Network interventions. Science 337(6090):49–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social WorkUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations