Peer Nominations and Its Relation to Interactions in a Computer Game

  • Juan F. Mancilla-Caceres
  • Eyal Amir
  • Dorothy Espelage
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7812)


Peer nomination has been one of the main tools used by social scientists to study the structure of social networks. Traditionally, the nominations are collected by asking participants to select a fixed number of peers, which in turn are all considered for the analysis with the same strength. In this paper, we explore several different ways of measuring the popularity of peers by taking into consideration not only the nominations themselves but their order and total quantity in the context of a computer social game. Using these different metrics, we explore the relationship between the nominations and the players’ interactions through text messages while playing the game. Although all five proposed metrics can be used to find popular individuals among peers, they allow scientists to measure different characteristics of the individuals as shown by the correlations found between popularity scores and interaction variables.


Group interaction and collaboration Influence process and recognition Methodological innovation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Espelage, D., Green, H., Wasserman, S.: Statistical Analysis of Friendship Patterns and Bullying Behaviors Among Youth. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 118, 61–75 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bramoulle, Y., Rogers, B.W.: Diversity and Popularity in Social Networks. CIRPEE Working Paper No. 09-03 (2009) Available at SSRN: or
  3. 3.
    Cairns, R.B., de Cairns, B., Neckerman, H.J., Gest, S.D., Gariepy, J.L.: Social Networks and Aggressive Behavior: Peer Support or Peer Rejection? Developmental Psychology 24(6), 815–823 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cillessen, A., Rose, A.: Understanding Popularity in the Peer System. American Psychological Society 14(2), 102–105 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garandeau, C., Ahn, H., Rodkin, P.: The Social Status of Aggressive Students Across Contexts: The Role of Classroom Status Hierarchy, Academic Achievement, and Grade. Developmental Psychology 47(6), 1699–1710 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ennet, S., Faris, R., Hipp, J., Foshee, V., Bauman, K., Andrea, H., Li, C.: Peer Smoking, Other Peer Attributes, and Adolescent Cigarette Smoking: A Social Network Analysis. Prevention Science 9(2), 88–98 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hawley, P.H.: Prosocial and Coercive Configurations of Resource Control in Early Adolescence: A Case for the Well-Adapted Machiavellian. Merril-Palmer Quarterly 49(3), 279–309 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kerestes, G., Milanovic, A.: Relations between different types of children’s aggressive behavior and sociometric status among peers of the same and opposite gender. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 47, 477–483 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mancilla-Caceres, J.F., Pu, W., Amir, E., Espelage, D.: A computer-in-the-loop approach for detecting bullies in the classroom. In: Yang, S.J., Greenberg, A.M., Endsley, M. (eds.) SBP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7227, pp. 139–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mancilla-Caceres, J.F., Pu, W., Amir, E., Espelage, D.: Identifying Bullies with a Computer Game. In: Proceedings of the 26th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-2012 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan F. Mancilla-Caceres
    • 1
  • Eyal Amir
    • 1
  • Dorothy Espelage
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations