Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T16:02:14.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Latent Space Network Model for Social Influence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Tracy Sweet and
Samrachana Adhikari
Tracy Sweet*
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Samrachana Adhikari
Affiliation:
New York University School of Medicine
*
Correspondence should bemade to Tracy Sweet, Department of HumanDevelopment and Quantitative Methodology, University of Maryland, College Park, USA. Email: tsweet@umd.edu
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Social network data represent interactions and relationships among groups of individuals. One aspect of social interaction is social influence, the idea that beliefs or behaviors change as a result of one’s social network. The purpose of this article is to introduce a new model for social influence, the latent space model for influence, which employs latent space positions so that individuals are affected most by those who are “closest” to them in the latent space. We describe this model along with some of the contexts in which it can be used and explore the operating characteristics using a series of simulation studies. We conclude with an example of teacher advice-seeking networks to show that changes in beliefs about teaching mathematics may be attributed to network influence.

Keywords

social networksnetwork modelslatent space modelsBayesiansocial influence

Information

Type
Theory and Methods
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 85 , Issue 2 , June 2020, pp. 251 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We would like acknowledge Jim Spillane and the Distributed Leadership Studies at Northwestern University, including the NebraskaMATH study, for the use of their data in this work. We greatly appreciate the help provided by Jim and his colleagues.

References

Airoldi, E., Blei, D., Fienberg, S. m., & Xing, E. (2008). Mixed membership stochastic blockmodels. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9, 1981– 2014. 21701698 Google ScholarPubMed
Alexander, C., Piazza, M., Mekos, D., & Valente, T. (2001). Peers, schools, and adolescent cigarette smoking. Journal of Adolescent Health, 29, 22– 30. 11429302 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, C. J., Wasserman, S., & Crouch, B. (1999). A p* primer: Logit models for social networks. Social Networks, 21, 37– 66. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christakis, N., & Fowler, J. H. (2010). Social network sensors for early detection of contagious outbreaks. PloS ONE, 5, e12948 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dabbs, B., Adhikari, S., & Sweet, T. (2019). Conditionally independent dyads (CID) network models: An integrative approach to statistical social network analysis. (Under review) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daragonova, G., Robins, G. Lusher, D. Koskinen, J. Robins, G. L. (2013). Autologistic actor attribute models. Exponential random graph models for social networks: Theories, methods and applications Cambridge, MA Cambridge University Press 102– 114. Google Scholar
Doreian, P. Griffith, D. (1989). Network autocorrelation models: Problems and prospects. Spatial statistics: Past, present, future Ann Arboro, MI Michigan Document Services 369– 393. Google Scholar
Eckhardt, A., Laumer, S., & Weitzel, T. (2009). Who influences whom? Analyzing workplace referents’ social influence on IT adoption and non-adoption. Journal of Information Technology, 24, 11– 24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, K. A., Lo, Y. -J., & Sun, M. (2014). Social network analysis of the influences of educational reforms on teachers practices and interactions. Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft, 17, 117– 134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, K. A., Muller, C., & Mueller, A. S. (2013). The embeddedness of adolescent friendship nominations: The formation of social capital in emergent network structures. American Journal of Sociology, 119, 216– 253. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, K. A., & Xu, R. (Forthcoming). Causal inference in network analysis: Navigating dependencies and alternative explanations to create good science. In Oxford handbook of social network analysis Google Scholar
Frank, K. A., Zhao, Y., & Borman, K. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: The case of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77, 148– 171. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujimoto, K., Wang, P., & Valente, T. (2013). The decomposed affiliation exposure model: A network approach to segregating peer influences from crowds and organized sports. Network Science, 1, 154– 169. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian data analysis 3 Boca Raton, FL Taylor & Francis. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A., Rubin, D. B. (1992). Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science, 7, 457– 472. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, S., Anderson, R. M., & May, R. M. (1989). Networks of sexual contacts: Implications for the pattern of spread of HIV. Aids, 3, 807– 818. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
He, Y., & Hoff, P. D. (2017). Multiplicative coevolution regression models for longitudinal networks and nodal attributes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.02497 Google Scholar
Hoff, P. D. (2005). Bilinear mixed-effects models for dyadic data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 286– 295. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff, P. D. (2009). Multiplicative latent factor models for description and prediction of social networks. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 15, 261– 272. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff, P. D., Raftery, A. E., & Handcock, M. S. (2002). Latent space approaches to social network analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97, 1090– 1098. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, R., Van den Bulte, C., & Valente, T. W. (2011). Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science, 30, 195– 212. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kashima, Y., Wilson, S., Lusher, D., Pearson, L., & Pearson, C. (2013). The acquisition of perceived descriptive norms as social category learning in social networks. Social Networks, 35, 711– 719. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koster, J. (2018). Family ties: The multilevel effects of households and kinship on the networks of individuals. Royal Society Open Science, 5, 172159– CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leenders, R. T. A. (2002). Modeling social influence through network autocorrelation: Constructing the weight matrix. Social Networks, 24, 21– 47. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paluck, E. L., & Shepherd, H. (2012). The salience of social referents: A field experiment of collective norms and harassment behavior in a school social network. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 899– 915. 22984831 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penuel, W. R., Sun, M., Frank, K. A., & Gallagher, H. A. (2012). Using social network analysis to study how collegial interactions can augment teacher learning from external professional development. American Journal of Education, 119, 103– 136. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rastelli, R., Friel, N., & Raftery, A. E. (2016). Properties of latent variable network models. Network Science, 4, 407– 432. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, G., Pattison, P., Kalish, Y., & Lusher, D. (2007). An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Social Networks, 29, 173– 191. (Special section: Advances in exponential random graph (p*) models) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, G. L., Pattison, P. E., & Elliott, P. (2001). Network models for social influence processes. Psychometrika, 66, 161– 189. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, P., & Moore, A. W. (2005). Dynamic social network analysis using latent space models. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 7, 31– 40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, D. M., Dam, I., Páez, A., & Wilton, R. D. (2012). Investigating the effects of social influence on the choice to telework. Environment and Planning A, 44, 1016– 1031. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sewell, D. K., & Chen, Y. (2015). Latent space models for dynamic networks. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 110, 1646– 1657. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shalizi, C., & Thomas, A. (2011). Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies. Sociological Methods & Research, 40, 211– 239. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shepherd, H., & Paluck, E. L. (2015). Stopping the drama: Gendered influence in a network field experiment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 78, 173– 193. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snijders, T. (1996). Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 21, 149– 172. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snijders, T. A., & Bosker, R. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling, 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Google Scholar
Snijders, T. A., & Steglich, C. E., Schweinberger, M., & Huisman, M. (2008). Manual for SIENA version 3.2, Groningen: University of Groningen: ICS, Department of Sociology. Google Scholar
Snijders, T. A., van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32, 44– 60. (Dynamics of social networks) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B., Steglich, C., & Schweinberger, M. Montfort, K., Oud, H., & Satorra, A. (2007). Modeling the co-evolution of networks and behavior. Longitudinal models in the behavioral and related sciences, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (41– 71). Google Scholar
Spillane, J. P., Hopkins, M. (2013). Organizing for instruction in education systems and school organizations: How the subject matters. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45, 721– 747. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spillane, J. P., Hopkins, M., & Sweet, T. M. (2018). School district educational infrastructure and change at scale: Teacher peer interactions and their beliefs about mathematics instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 55, 532– 571. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steglich, C., Sinclair, P., Holliday, J., & Moore, L. (2012). Actor-based analysis of peer influence in A Stop Smoking In Schools Trial (ASSIST). Social Networks, 34, 359– 369. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steglich, C., Snijders, T. A., & Pearson, M. (2010). Dynamic networks and behavior: Separating selection from influence. Sociological Methodology, 40, 329– 393. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, M., Penuel, W. R., Frank, K. A., Gallagher, H. A., & Youngs, P. (2013). Shaping professional development to promote the diffusion of instructional expertise among teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35, 344– 369. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, T. M. (2019). Modeling social networks as mediators: A mixed membership stochastic blockmodel for mediation. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 44, 210– 240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, T. M., Thomas, A. C., & Junker, B. W. (2013). Hierarchical network models for education research: Hierarchical latent space models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 38, 295– 318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valente, T. W. Carrington, P., Scott, J., & Wasserman, S. (2005). Network models and methods for studying the diffusion of innovations. Models and methods in social network analysis, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 98– 116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Weele, T. J., An, W. Morgan, S. Social networks and causal inference. Handbook of causal analysis for social research, (2013). New York, NY: Springer. (353– 374). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watts, D. J., Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 441– 458. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinbaum, E., Cole, R., Weiss, M., & Supovitz, J. Supovitz, J., & Weinbaum, E. (2008). Going with the flow: Communication and reform in high schools. The implementation gap: Understanding reform in high schools, New York, NY: Teachers College Press. 68– 102. Google Scholar
Zheng, K., Padman, R., Krackhardt, D., Johnson, M. P., & Diamond, H. S. (2010). Social networks and physician adoption of electronic health records: Insights from an empirical study. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 17, 328– 336. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed