Chapter 4 Networks in Their Surrounding Contexts - Cornell University
Chapter 4 Networks in Their Surrounding Contexts - Cornell University
Chapter 4 Networks in Their Surrounding Contexts - Cornell University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
4.3. AFFILIATION 93<br />
Anna<br />
Daniel<br />
Literacy<br />
Volunteers<br />
Karate<br />
Club<br />
Figure 4.3: An affiliation network is a bipartite graph that shows which <strong>in</strong>dividuals are<br />
affiliated with which groups or activities. Here, Anna participates <strong>in</strong> both of the social foci<br />
on the right, while Daniel participates <strong>in</strong> only one.<br />
4.3 Affiliation<br />
Thus far, we have been discuss<strong>in</strong>g contextual factors that affect the formation of l<strong>in</strong>ks <strong>in</strong><br />
a network — based on similarities <strong>in</strong> characteristics of the nodes, and based on behaviors<br />
and activities that the nodes engage <strong>in</strong>. These surround<strong>in</strong>g contexts have been viewed,<br />
appropriately, as exist<strong>in</strong>g “outside” the network. But <strong>in</strong> fact, it’s possible to put these<br />
contexts <strong>in</strong>to the network itself, by work<strong>in</strong>g with a larger network that conta<strong>in</strong>s both people<br />
and contexts as nodes. Through such a network formulation, we will get additional <strong>in</strong>sight<br />
<strong>in</strong>to some broad aspects of homophily, and see how the simultaneous evolution of contexts<br />
and friendships can be put on a common network foot<strong>in</strong>g with the notion of triadic closure<br />
from <strong>Chapter</strong> 3.<br />
In pr<strong>in</strong>ciple we could represent any context this way, but for the sake of concreteness we’ll<br />
focus on how to represent the set of activities a person takes part <strong>in</strong>, and how these affect<br />
the formation of l<strong>in</strong>ks. We will take a very general view of the notion of an “activity” here.<br />
Be<strong>in</strong>g part of a particular company, organization, or neigborhood; frequent<strong>in</strong>g a particular<br />
place; pursu<strong>in</strong>g a particular hobby or <strong>in</strong>terest — these are all activities that, when shared<br />
between two people, tend to <strong>in</strong>crease the likelihood that they will <strong>in</strong>teract and hence form a<br />
l<strong>in</strong>k <strong>in</strong> the social network [78, 161]. Adopt<strong>in</strong>g term<strong>in</strong>ology due to Scott Feld, we’ll refer to<br />
such activities as foci — that is, “focal po<strong>in</strong>ts” of social <strong>in</strong>teraction — constitut<strong>in</strong>g “social,<br />
psychological, legal, or physical entit[ies] around which jo<strong>in</strong>t activities are organized (e.g.<br />
workplaces, voluntary organizations, hangouts, etc.)” [161].<br />
Affiliation <strong>Networks</strong>. As a first step, we can represent the participation of a set of people<br />
<strong>in</strong> a set of foci us<strong>in</strong>g a graph as follows. We will have a node for each person, and a node<br />
for each focus, and we will connect person A to focus X by an edge if A participates <strong>in</strong> X.