User Tools

Site Tools


social_network_analysis_on_historical_data

Introduction

Tools

PADGETT FLORENTINE FAMILIES Study

<fs x-large>PADGETT FLORENTINE FAMILIES</fs>
DATASET PADGETT and PADGW / Pajek

DESCRIPTION PADGETT

Two 16×16 matrices:

PADGB symmetric binary
PADGM symmetric binary
PADGW
One 16×3 matrix, valued.

BACKGROUND Breiger & Pattison (1986), in their discussion of local role analysis, use a subset of data on the social relations among Renaissance Florentine families (person aggregates) collected by John Padgett from historical documents. The two relations are business ties (PADGB - specifically, recorded financial ties such as loans, credits and joint partnerships) and marriage alliances (PADGM).

As Breiger & Pattison point out, the original data are symmetrically coded. This is acceptable perhaps for marital ties, but is unfortunate for the financial ties (which are almost certainly directed). To remedy this, the financial ties can be recoded as directed relations using some external measure of power - for instance, a measure of wealth. PADGW provides information on (1) each family's net wealth in 1427 (in thousands of lira); (2) the number of priorates (seats on the civic council) held between 1282- 1344; and (3) the total number of business or marriage ties in the total dataset of 116 families (see Breiger & Pattison (1986), p 239).

Substantively, the data include families who were locked in a struggle for political control of the city of Florence in around 1430. Two factions were dominant in this struggle: one revolved around the infamous Medicis (9), the other around the powerful Strozzis (15).

REFERENCES

  • Breiger R. and Pattison P. (1986). Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras. Social Networks, 8, 215-256. PDF
  • Kent D. (1978). The rise of the Medici: Faction in Florence, 1426-1434. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Padgett, John F; Ansell, Christopher K. (1993). Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400-1434. The American Journal of Sociology, 98 (6). PDF

<fs x-large>PADGETT FLORENTINE FAMILIES</fs>
DATASET PADGETT and PADGW / Pajek

DESCRIPTION PADGETT

Two 16×16 matrices:

PADGB symmetric binary
PADGM symmetric binary
PADGW
One 16×3 matrix, valued.

BACKGROUND
Breiger & Pattison (1986)은 르네상스 시기의 프로렌틴 지역의 가문 간의 사회적인 관계에 대한 데이터세트를 사용하여 지역사회의 가문의 역할 분석을 하였다. 실제 데이터는 존 패젯의 역사문서에서 추출한 것이었다. 두가지 종류의 데이터는 비지니스 관계와 결혼관계였는데, 전자는 (PADGB) 대출이나 크레딘트, 그리고 동업자 관계 등을 파함하는 금전적인 거래관계를 의미하는 것이었고, 후자는 자녀의 혼인을 나타내는 것이었다 (PADGM).

Breiger & Pattison이 지적하듯이, 원래 데이터는 대칭적으로 코딩된 것이었다. 혼인관계 데이터에 한해서는 이런 방식이 적적한 것이었지만, 금전적인 관계는 그렇지 못했다 (대개는 금전적인 관계는 비대칭적인 관계이기 마련이다). 이를 해결하고자, 이들은 각 가문의 부의 정도를 기준으로 금전적인 관계가 방향성이 있도록 하였다. PADGW 데이터는 (1) 1427년의 각 가문의 부의 측정치를 기록한 것이고; (2) 1282-1344 기간 동안의 수도원장의 숫자를 포함하였고 (3) 전체 데이터는 116 가문의 의 비지니스와 혼인관계의 숫자를 기록하는 것이었다 (Breiger & Pattison (1986), p 239).

Substantively, the data include families who were locked in a struggle for political control of the city of Florence in around 1430. Two factions were dominant in this struggle: one revolved around the infamous Medicis (9), the other around the powerful Strozzis (15).

REFERENCES

  • Breiger R. and Pattison P. (1986). Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras. Social Networks, 8, 215-256. PDF
  • Kent D. (1978). The rise of the Medici: Faction in Florence, 1426-1434. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Padgett, John F; Ansell, Christopher K. (1993). Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400-1434. The American Journal of Sociology, 98 (6). PDF
  • Economic Credit and Elite Transformation in Renaissance Florence. PDF

Data

DL
N=16 NM=2
FORMAT = FULLMATRIX DIAGONAL PRESENT
ROW LABELS:
ACCIAIUOL
ALBIZZI
BARBADORI
BISCHERI
CASTELLAN
GINORI
GUADAGNI
LAMBERTES
MEDICI
PAZZI
PERUZZI
PUCCI
RIDOLFI
SALVIATI
STROZZI
TORNABUON
COLUMN LABELS:
ACCIAIUOL
ALBIZZI
BARBADORI
BISCHERI
CASTELLAN
GINORI
GUADAGNI
LAMBERTES
MEDICI
PAZZI
PERUZZI
PUCCI
RIDOLFI
SALVIATI
STROZZI
TORNABUON
LEVEL LABELS:
PADGM
PADGB
DATA:
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DL
NR=16 NC=3
FORMAT = FULLMATRIX DIAGONAL PRESENT
ROW LABELS:
ACCIAIUOL
ALBIZZI
RIDOLFI
STROZZI
BARBADORI
BISCHERI
CASTELLAN
GUADAGNI
LAMBERTES
MEDICI
PAZZI
PERUZZI
SALVIATI
TORNABUON
GINORI
PUCCI
COLUMN LABELS:
WEALTH
#PRIORS
#TIES
DATA:
  10  53   2
  36  65   3
  27  38   4
 146  74  29
  55   0  14
  44  12   9
  20  22  18
   8  21  14
  42   0  14
 103  53  54
  48   0   7
  49  42  32
  10  35   5
  48   0   7
  32   0   9
   3   0   1

Analysis, visual


QAP

QAP result

QAP CORRELATION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Data Matrices:                          PADGB
                                        PADGM
# of Permutations:                      5000
Random seed:                            8954
Method:                                 Fast: no missing values allowed


QAP results for PADGM * PADGB (5000 permutations)

                                 1         2         3         4         5         6         7         8
                         Obs Value Significa   Average   Std Dev   Minimum   Maximum Prop >= O Prop <= O
                         --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
    Pearson Correlation     0.3719    0.0016    0.0032    0.0944   -0.1690    0.4395    0.0016    0.9998



QAP Correlations

               1     2
           PADGB PADGM
           ----- -----
  1 PADGB  1.000 0.372
  2 PADGM  0.372 1.000


QAP P-Values

               1     2
           PADGB PADGM
           ----- -----
  1 PADGB  0.000 0.002
  2 PADGM  0.002 0.000

QAP statistics saved as datafile QAP Correlation Results

----------------------------------------
Running time:  00:00:01
Output generated:  12 5 16 08:44:36
UCINET 6.528 Copyright (c) 1992-2012 Analytic Technologies

Sampson Monastery

<fs x-large>Sampson Monastery</fs>
Overview

The Sampson Monastery dataset consists of social relations among a set of 18 monk-novitiates preparing to enter a monastery. The data include a variety of relations, such as liking, dislike, influence and so on. There are three separate matrices for liking, representing liking relations at three points in time. (Regrettably, the data were collected retrospectively so they are not truly longitudinal.)

Network Dataset

The dataset name is SAMPSON, and includes the following ten 18×18 matrices:

  • SAMPLK1 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPLK2 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPLK3 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPDLK non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPES non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPDES non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPIN non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPNIN non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPPR non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPNPR non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)

The labels on the data have the abbreviated names followed by the codings used by Breiger and Boorman in all their work.

Background

Samuel F. Sampson recorded the social interactions among a group of monks while resident as an experimenter on vision, and collected numerous sociometric rankings. Some novices had attended the minor seminary of 'Cloisterville' before they came to the monastery. During his stay, a political “crisis in the cloister” resulted in the expulsion of four monks (Nos. 2, 3, 17, and 18) and the voluntary departure of several others - most immediately, Nos. 1, 7, 14, 15, and 16. (In the end, only 5, 6, 9, and 11 remained). All the numbers used refer to the Breiger et al numbering and are not row or column labels. Hence in the end Bonaventure, Berthold, Ambrose and Louis all remained.

Most of the present data are retrospective, collected after the breakup occurred. They concern a period during which a new cohort entered the monastery near the end of the study but before the major conflict began. The exceptions are “liking” data gathered at three times: SAMPLK1 to SAMPLK3 - that reflect changes in group sentiment over time (SAMPLK3 was collected in the same wave as the data described below). Information about the senior monks was not included.

Four relations are coded, with separate matrices for positive and negative ties on the relation. Each member ranked only his top three choices on that tie. The relations are esteem (SAMPES) and disesteem (SAMPDES), liking (SAMPLK) and disliking (SAMPDLK), positive influence (SAMPIN) and negative influence (SAMPNIN), praise (SAMPPR) and blame (SAMPNPR). In all rankings 3 indicates the highest or first choice and 1 the last choice. (Some subjects offered tied ranks for their top four choices).

Based on his observations and analyses, Sampson divided the novices into four groups: Young Turks, Loyal Opposition, Outcasts, and an interstitial group. The Loyal Opposition consists of the novices who entered the monastery first. The Young Turks arrived later, in a period of change. They questioned practices in the monastery, which the members of the Loyal Opposition defended. Some novices did not take sides in this debate, so they are labeled 'interstitial'. The Outcasts are novices who were not accepted in the group.

<fs x-large>Sampson Monastery</fs>
Overview

샘슨 수도원 데이터셋는 18명의 수도원에 들어가고자 준비하는 수련수사들 간의 사회적인 관계로 구성되어 있다. 데이터는 다양한 관계를 포함하는데, 좋아함, 싫어함, 영향력 등등이 그것이다. 좋아함의 데이터는 또한 세가지 종류가 있는데 시기가 다른 세 시점을 나타내는 것이다 (그렇지만, 이 데이터는 최종의 시점에서 회상을 통해서 한꺼번에 구한 것이라 진정한 의미에서의 종단적인 데이터가 아니라고 하겠다).
.

Network Dataset

데이터세트 이름은 SAMPSON이고 다음과 같은 10개의 18×18 matrices를 포함한다:

  • SAMPLK1 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPLK2 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPLK3 non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPDLK non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPES non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPDES non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPIN non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPNIN non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPPR non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)
  • SAMPNPR non-symmetric, valued
    (rankings of top 3 choices)

The labels on the data have the abbreviated names followed by the codings used by Breiger and Boorman in all their work.

Background

사무엘 F. 샘슨은 수사그룹의 구성원 간의 사회적인 상호작용을 기록하였다. 비전에 관한 실험자로서 머물면서 다양한 사회계량순서를 수집하였다. 이 곳에 오기전에 Cloisterville이라는 소신학교를 다닌 신부도 있었다. 샘슨이 머무는 동안, 정치적인 수도생활의 위기로 말미암아 4명의 신부가 파계(expulsion) 당하는 (Nos. 2, 3, 17, and 18) 일이 있었으며 동시에 몇몇은 자발적으로 수도원을 떠나기도 하였는데 대부분은 파계사건 바로 직후였는데, Nos. 1, 7, 14, 15, and 16 가 그들이었고 이로 인해 결국 5, 6, 9, 11만이 수도원에 남게되었다. 이 ID들은 실제 데이터상의 번호가 아니라 Breiger et al.이 부여한 아이디를 말하는 것으로 최종으로 남은 수도승은 Bonaventure, Berthold, Ambrose와 Louis 였다.

Most of the present data are retrospective, collected after the breakup occurred. They concern a period during which a new cohort entered the monastery near the end of the study but before the major conflict began. The exceptions are “liking” data gathered at three times: SAMPLK1 to SAMPLK3 - that reflect changes in group sentiment over time (SAMPLK3 was collected in the same wave as the data described below). Information about the senior monks was not included.

Four relations are coded, with separate matrices for positive and negative ties on the relation. Each member ranked only his top three choices on that tie. The relations are esteem (SAMPES) and disesteem (SAMPDES), liking (SAMPLK) and disliking (SAMPDLK), positive influence (SAMPIN) and negative influence (SAMPNIN), praise (SAMPPR) and blame (SAMPNPR). In all rankings 3 indicates the highest or first choice and 1 the last choice. (Some subjects offered tied ranks for their top four choices).

Based on his observations and analyses, Sampson divided the novices into four groups: Young Turks, Loyal Opposition, Outcasts, and an interstitial group. The Loyal Opposition consists of the novices who entered the monastery first. The Young Turks arrived later, in a period of change. They questioned practices in the monastery, which the members of the Loyal Opposition defended. Some novices did not take sides in this debate, so they are labeled 'interstitial'. The Outcasts are novices who were not accepted in the group.

References

  • Breiger, R., Boorman, S. & Arabie, P. 1975. An algorithm for clustering relational data with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 12: 328-383. PDF
social_network_analysis_on_historical_data.txt · Last modified: 2016/07/19 17:08 by hkimscil