Advertisement

Health, Grades and Friendship: How Socially Constructed Characteristics Influence the Social Network Structure

  • Sofia DokukaEmail author
  • Ekaterina Krekhovets
  • Margarita Priymak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10716)

Abstract

Homophily - tendency for people to form social connections with similar others - is one of the key topics in social network analysis. It indicates to what extent people tend to be similar to their friends and in what dimensions. For the long time homophily was just an index of the social similarity, but for the recent years the interest for the homophily formation, dynamics and multidimensionality increased. In this paper we investigate the homophily in such social constructed behavior as food consumption and academic achievements. The study of body mass index in social network context reveals the presence of homophily, which means that persons with similar constitution are more likely to be interconnected with each other. Interestingly, that healthy food consumption has no impact on social network formation, but there is homophily based on fast food consumption. Thus, ‘bad habits’ are stronger forces for the social ties formation. This results show that social constructed behavior is an important component on the process of social network formation.

Keywords

Social networks Homophily Student networks Health Food consumption Academic achievements Higher education 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Maria Yudkevich for help and discussion. The financial support of the 5-100 Government Program and Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) is greatly appreciated.

References

  1. 1.
    McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., Cook, J.M.: Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 27, 415–444 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lazarsfeld, P.F., Merton, R.K., et al.: Friendship as a social process: a substantive and methodological analysis. Freedom Control Mod. Soc. 18, 18–66 (1954)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kandel, D.B.: Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. Am. J. Sociol. 84, 427–436 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suitor, J., Keeton, S.: Once a friend, always a friend? Effects of homophily on women’s support networks across a decade. Soc. Netw. 19, 51–62 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Newman, L., Dale, A.: Homophily and agency: creating effective sustainable development networks. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 9, 79–90 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Furman, W., Simon, V.A.: Homophily in adolescent romantic relationships. In: Understanding Peer Influence in Children and Adolescents, pp. 203–224 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., Wimmer, A., Christakis, N.: Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network dataset using facebook.com. Soc. Netw. 30, 330–342 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Steglich, C., Snijders, T.A., Pearson, M.: Dynamic networks and behavior: separating selection from influence. Sociol. Method. 40, 329–393 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dokuka, S., Valeeva, D., Yudkevich, M.: Homophily evolution in online networks: Who is a good friend and when? In: Ignatov, D.I., Khachay, M.Y., Labunets, V.G., Loukachevitch, N., Nikolenko, S.I., Panchenko, A., Savchenko, A.V., Vorontsov, K. (eds.) AIST 2016. CCIS, vol. 661, pp. 91–99. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52920-2_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Snijders, T.A., Van de Bunt, G.G., Steglich, C.E.: Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc. Netw. 32, 44–60 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dokuka, S., Valeeva, D., Yudkevich, M.: The Diffusion of Academic Achievements: Social Selection and Influence in Student Networks (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Christakis, N.A., Fowler, J.H.: The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 370–379 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Becker, G.S.: Health as human capital: synthesis and extensions. Oxford Econ. Pap. 59, 379–410 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Freier, R., Schumann, M., Siedler, T.: The earnings returns to graduating with honors-evidence from law graduates. Labour Econ. 34, 39–50 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gleason, P.M.: College student employment, academic progress, and postcollege labor market success. J. Student Financ. Aid 23, 5–14 (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jones, E.B., Jackson, J.D.: College grades and labor market rewards. J. Hum. Resour. 25, 253–266 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rourke, B.P., Finlayson, M.A.J.: Neuropsychological significance of variations in patterns of academic performance: Verbal and visual-spatial abilities. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 6, 121–133 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sirin, S.R.: Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research. Rev. Educ. Res. 75, 417–453 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wasserman, S., Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, vol. 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lomi, A., Snijders, T.A., Steglich, C.E., Torló, V.J.: Why are some more peer than others? Evidence from a longitudinal study of social networks and individual academic performance. Soc. Sci. Res. 40, 1506–1520 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Flashman, J.: Academic achievement and its impact on friend dynamics. Sociol. Educ. 85, 61–80 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dokuka, S., Valeeva, D., Yudkevich, M.: Formation and evolution mechanisms in online network of students: the Vkontakte case. In: Khachay, M.Y., Konstantinova, N., Panchenko, A., Ignatov, D.I., Labunets, V.G. (eds.) AIST 2015. CCIS, vol. 542, pp. 263–274. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26123-2_26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sacerdote, B.: Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Dartmouth roommates. Q. J. Econ. 116, 681–704 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vaquero, L.M., Cebrian, M.: The rich club phenomenon in the classroom. Sci. Rep. 3 (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cohen-Cole, E., Fletcher, J.M.: Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs. environmental factors in the obesity epidemic. J. Health Econ. 27, 1382–1387 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fowler, J.H., Christakis, N.A.: Estimating peer effects on health in social networks: a response to Cohen-cole and Fletcher; Trogdon, Nonnemaker, Pais. J. Health Econ. 27, 1400 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    De La Haye, K., Robins, G., Mohr, P., Wilson, C.: How physical activity shapes, and is shaped by, adolescent friendships. Soc. Sci. Med. 73, 719–728 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mercken, L., Snijders, T.A., Steglich, C., Vartiainen, E., De Vries, H.: Dynamics of adolescent friendship networks and smoking behavior. Soc. Netw. 32, 72–81 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Quetelet, A.: Physique sociale, ou essai sur le développement des facultés de l’homme, vol. 2. C. Muquardt (1869)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gouldner, A.W.: The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am. Sociol. Rev. 25, 161–178 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Barabási, A.L., Albert, R.: Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286, 509–512 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robins, G., Pattison, P., Kalish, Y., Lusher, D.: An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Soc. Netw. 29, 173–191 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prell, C.: Social Network Analysis: History, Theory and Methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Harris, J.K., Carothers, B.J., Wald, L.M., Shelton, S.C., Leischow, S.J.: Interpersonal influence among public health leaders in the united states department of health and human services. J. Public Health Res. 1, 67 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ellwardt, L., Labianca, G.J., Wittek, R.: Who are the objects of positive and negative gossip at work?: A social network perspective on workplace gossip. Soc. Netw. 34, 193–205 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Team, R.C.: R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2013 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sofia Dokuka
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ekaterina Krekhovets
    • 1
  • Margarita Priymak
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Institutional StudiesNRU HSEMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations