social_network_analysis_on_historical_data
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
social_network_analysis_on_historical_data [2016/07/19 15:39] – [Sampson Monastery] hkimscil | social_network_analysis_on_historical_data [2016/07/19 17:08] (current) – [PADGETT FLORENTINE FAMILIES Study] hkimscil | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
* https:// | * https:// | ||
* [[: | * [[: | ||
- | <WRAP box 48%> | + | <WRAP column half> |
+ | <WRAP box> | ||
<fs x-large> | <fs x-large> | ||
DATASET PADGETT and PADGW / Pajek | DATASET PADGETT and PADGW / Pajek | ||
Line 38: | Line 39: | ||
**__REFERENCES__** | **__REFERENCES__** | ||
- | * Breiger R. and Pattison P. (1986). Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras. Social Networks, 8, 215-256. {{|PDF}} | + | * Breiger R. and Pattison P. (1986). Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras. Social Networks, 8, 215-256. {{_cumulated-social-roles-the-duality-of-persons-and-their-algebras.pdf|PDF}} |
* Kent D. (1978). The rise of the Medici: Faction in Florence, 1426-1434. Oxford: Oxford University Press. | * 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). {{PadgettAnsell_AJS_1993.pdf|PDF}} | * Padgett, John F; Ansell, Christopher K. (1993). Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400-1434. The American Journal of Sociology, 98 (6). {{PadgettAnsell_AJS_1993.pdf|PDF}} | ||
+ | </ | ||
</ | </ | ||
+ | <WRAP column half> | ||
+ | <WRAP box> | ||
+ | <fs x-large> | ||
+ | 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, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Breiger & Pattison이 지적하듯이, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Substantively, | ||
+ | |||
+ | **__REFERENCES__** | ||
+ | * Breiger R. and Pattison P. (1986). Cumulated social roles: The duality of persons and their algebras. Social Networks, 8, 215-256. {{_cumulated-social-roles-the-duality-of-persons-and-their-algebras.pdf|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). {{PadgettAnsell_AJS_1993.pdf|PDF}} | ||
+ | * Economic Credit and Elite Transformation in Renaissance Florence. {{Economic Credit and Elite Transformation in Renaissance Florence.pdf|PDF}} | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | ===== Data ===== | ||
< | < | ||
N=16 NM=2 | N=16 NM=2 | ||
Line 161: | Line 191: | ||
| | ||
</ | </ | ||
+ | ===== Analysis, visual ===== | ||
{{ : | {{ : | ||
{{ : | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== QAP ===== | ||
**__QAP result__** | **__QAP result__** | ||
Line 271: | Line 304: | ||
Background | Background | ||
- | Samuel | + | 사무엘 |
Most of the present data are retrospective, | Most of the present data are retrospective, | ||
- | 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). | + | 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), |
+ | |||
+ | Based on his observations and analyses, Sampson divided the novices into four groups: __Young Turks__, __Loyal Opposition__, | ||
+ | |||
+ | 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. {{An_Algorithm_for_Clustering_Relational_Data_with_A.pdf|PDF}} | ||
+ | * | ||
- | 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 ' | ||
</ | </ | ||
</ | </ |
social_network_analysis_on_historical_data.1468912181.txt.gz · Last modified: 2016/07/19 15:39 by hkimscil