Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining

Living Edition
| Editors: Reda Alhajj, Jon Rokne

Quality of Social Network Data

  • Germà Coenders
  • Tina Kogovšek
  • Valentina Hlebec
  • Lluís Coromina
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7163-9_398-1




Extent to which the perceived (cognitive) network corresponds to the “actual” (behavioral) network


Extent to which relationships among variables are lower than they should be as a result of measurement error

Cognitive Interview

In-depth interview conducted with the aim of understanding the mental process through which the respondent understands the question and produces the answer


Assignment of numbers to objects according to rules

Measurement Error

Discrepancy between a true and observed characteristic. It may be random (lack of reliability) or systematic (lack of validity)


Assignment of empirical indicators (e.g., survey questions) to a theoretical variable to be measured

Pearson Correlation Coefficient

Statistical measure of association between two numeric variables which are assumed to be linearly related, ranging from 1 (perfect linear positive relationship) to −1 (perfect linear...


Social Network Analysis Network Member Cognitive Interview Friendship Network Confirmatory Factor Analysis Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Bernard HR, Killworth PD (1977) Informant accuracy in social network data II. Hum Commun Res 4:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernard HR, Killworth PD, Sailer L (1979/1980) Informant accuracy in social network data IV: a comparison of clique-level structure in behavioral and cognitive network data. Soc Netw 2:191–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernard HR, Killworth PD, Sailer L (1982) Informant accuracy in social network data V: an experimental attempt to predict actual communication from recall data. Soc Sci Res 11:30–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernard HR, Killworth PD, Kronenfeld D, Sailer L (1985) On the validity of retrospective data. Annu Rev Anthropol 13:495–517. Palo Alto, Stanford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bondonio D (1998) Predictors of accuracy in perceiving informal social networks. Soc Netw 20:301–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Callegaro M, Lozar-Manfreda K, Vehovar V (2015) Web survey methodology. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Cantril H (1944) Gauging public opinion. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Casciaro T (1998) Seeing things clearly: social structure, personality and accuracy in social network perception. Soc Netw 20:331–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coenders G, Hlebec V, Kogovšek T (2011) Measurement quality in indicators of compositions: a compositional multitrait-multimethod approach. Surv Res Methods 5:63–74Google Scholar
  10. Coromina L, Coenders G (2006) Reliability and validity of egocentered network data collected via web: a metaanalysis of multilevel multitrait multimethod studies. Soc Netw 28:209–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferligoj A, Hlebec V (1999) Evaluation of social network measurement instruments. Soc Netw 21:111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freeman LC, Romney AK (1987) Words, deeds and social structure: a preliminary study of the reliability of informants. Hum Organ 46:330–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freeman LC, Romney AK, Freeman SC (1987) Cognitive structure and informant accuracy. Am Anthropol 89:311–325Google Scholar
  14. Hlebec V, Ferligoj A (2001) Respondent mood and the instability of survey network measurements. Soc Netw 23:125–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hlebec V, Kogovšek T (2013) Different approaches to measure ego-centered social support networks: a meta-analysis. Qual Quant 47:3435–3455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Killworth PD, Bernard HR (1976) Informant accuracy in social network data. Hum Organ 3:269–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Killworth PD, Bernard HR (1979/1980) Informant accuracy in social network data III: a comparison of triadic structure in behavioral and cognitive data. Soc Netw 2:10–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kogovšek T (2006) Reliability and validity of measuring social support networks by the web and telephone. Metodološki Zvezki 3:239–252Google Scholar
  19. Kogovšek T, Ferligoj A (2005) Effects on reliability and validity of egocentered network measurements. Soc Netw 27:205–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kogovšek T, Hlebec V (2008) Measuring ego-centered social networks: do cheaper methods with low respondent burden provide good estimates of network composition? Metodološki Zvezki 5:127–143Google Scholar
  21. Kogovšek T, Ferligoj A, Saris WE, Coenders G (2002) Estimating the reliability and validity of personal support measures: full information ML estimation with planned incomplete data. Soc Netw 24:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kogovšek T, Coenders G, Hlebec V (2013) Predictors and outcomes of social network compositions: a compositional structural equation modeling approach. Soc Netw. 35:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2012.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Krackhardt D (1987) Cognitive social structures. Soc Netw 9:109–134MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lozar Manfreda K, Koren G, Vehovar V, Hlebec V (2004a) Collecting data on ego-centered social networks on the web: methodological issues. In: SUNBELT XXIV international social network conference, Portorož, 12–16 May 2004, p 162Google Scholar
  25. Lozar Manfreda K, Vehovar V, Hlebec V (2004b) Collecting ego-centered network data via the web. Metodološki zvezki 1:295–321Google Scholar
  26. Marsden PV (1993) The reliability of network density and composition measures. Soc Netw 15:399–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morgan DL, Neal MB, Carder P (1997) The stability of core and peripheral networks over time. Soc Netw 19:9–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nadoh J, Podreberšek P, Hlebec V (2004) Cognitive evaluation of the hierarchical approach for measuring ego-centered social networks. Metodološki Zvezki 1:379–393Google Scholar
  29. Pattison P (1994) Social cognition in context: some applications of social network analysis. In: Wasserman S, Galaskiewicz J (eds) Advances in social network analysis: research in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 79–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ, Tolosana-Delgado R (2015) Modeling and analysis of compositional data. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  31. Vaux A (1988) Social support, theory, research, and intervention. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Vehovar V, Lozar Manfreda K, Koren G, Hlebec V (2008) Measuring ego-centered social networks on the web: questionnaire design issues. Soc Netw 30:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zemljič B, Hlebec V (2005) Reliability of measures of centrality and prominence. Soc Netw 27:73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Recommended Reading

  1. Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1979) Reliability and validity assessment. Sage, Beverly HillsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Groves RM, Fowler FJ Jr, Couper MP, Lepkowski JM, Singer E, Tourangeau R (2009) Survey methodology. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Schuman H, Presser S (1996) Questions and answers in attitude surveys: experiments on question form, order and context. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  4. Sudman S, Bradburn NM, Schwarz N (1996) Thinking about answers: the application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Germà Coenders
    • 1
  • Tina Kogovšek
    • 2
  • Valentina Hlebec
    • 3
  • Lluís Coromina
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  2. 2.Faculty of Arts and Faculty of Social SciencesUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  3. 3.Faculty of Social SciencesUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia