Social Status Computation for Nodes of Overlapping Communities in Directed Signed Social Networks

  • Nancy GirdharEmail author
  • K. K. Bharadwaj
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 771)


The exponential growth in signed social networks in recent years has garnered the interest of numerous researchers in the field. Social balance theory and status theory are the two most prevalent theories of signed social networks and are used for the same purpose. Many researchers have incorporated the concept of social balance theory into their work with community detection problems in order to gain a better understanding of these networks. Social balance theory is suitable for undirected signed social networks; however, it does not consider the direction of the ties formed among users. When dealing with directed signed social networks, researchers simply ignore the direction of ties, which diminishes the significance of the tie direction information. To overcome this, in this chapter we present a mathematical formulation for computing the social status of nodes based on status theory, termed the status factor, which is well suited for directed signed social networks. The status factor is used to quantify social status for each node of overlapping communities in a directed signed social network, and the feasibility of the proposed algorithm for this metric is well illustrated through an example.


Status theory Social balance theory Overlapping communities Directed signed social networks 


  1. 1.
    Agarwal, V., and K.K. Bharadwaj. 2015. Predicting the dynamics of social circles in ego networks using pattern analysis and GA K-means clustering. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 5 (3): 113–141.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anchuri, P., and M. Magdon-Ismail. 2012. Communities and balance in signed networks: A spectral approach. In Advances in social networks analysis and mining, 235–242.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Awal, G.K., and K.K. Bharadwaj. 2017. Leveraging collective intelligence for behavioral prediction in signed social networks through evolutionary approach. Information Systems Frontiers, 1–23.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Facchetti, G., G. Iacono, and C. Altafini. 2011. Computing global structural balance in large-scale signed social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (52): 20953–20958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Girdhar, N., and K.K. Bharadwaj. 2016. Signed social networks: A survey. In Proceedings of the international conferences on advances in computing and data sciences, 326–335.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heider, F. 1946. Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology 21 (1): 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kunegis, J., S. Schmidt, A. Lommatzsch, J. Lerner, E.W. De Luca, and S. Albayrak. 2010. Spectral analysis of signed graphs for clustering, prediction and visualization. In Proceedings of the international conferences of SIAM on data mining, 559–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leskovec, J., D. Huttenlocher, and J. Kleinberg. 2010. Signed networks in social media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conferences on human factors in computing systems, 1361–1370.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Truzzi, M. 1973. An empirical examination of attitude consistency in complex cognitive structures. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 18 (1): 52–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yap, J., and N. Harrigan. 2015. Why does everybody hate me? Balance, status, and homophily: The triumvirate of signed tie formation. Social Networks 40: 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhao, Y., S. Li, and F. Jin. 2016. Identification of influential nodes in social networks with community structure based on label propagation. Neurocomputing 210: 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer and Systems SciencesJawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations