This paper introduces some regression models for a categorical dependent variable with data from egocentric social networks as covariates to analyze the determinants of the outcome for the subject and the determinants of the extent of agreement in the outcome between the subject and the people socially connected to the subject. The merits of the models introduced in this paper are their wide applicability to surveys that collect data on egocentric social networks and their ability to identify the determinants of agreement between subjects’ and their friends’ attitudinal or behavioral outcomes, controlling for the tendency to agree because of homophily in the choice of friends. An illustrative application from the Japanese General Social Survey data shows that several substantively distinct characteristics of egocentric networks affect subjects’ political party preferences and the extent of agreement between the political party preferences of subjects and their significant others.
BurtRonald S.1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
ChristakisNicholas A.FowlerJames H.2007. “The Spread of Obesity in a Large Social Network over 32 Years.” New England Journal of Medicine357(4):370–79.
3.
ChristakisNicholas A.FowlerJames H.2008. “The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network.” New England Journal of Medicine358(21):2249–58.
4.
ChristakisNicholas A.FowlerJames H.2009. Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shave Our Lives. New York: Little, Brown.
5.
CloggClifford C.1982. “Some Models for the Analysis of Association in Multi-way Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories.” Journal of the American Statistical Association77:803–15.
6.
Cohen-ColeEthanFletcherJames M.2008. “Is Obesity Contagious? Social Networks vs. Environmental Factors in Obesity Epidemic.” Journal of Health Economics27(5):1382–87.
7.
FischerClaude S.1982. To Dwell among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8.
FowlerJames H.ChristakisNicholas A.2008. “Estimating Peer Effects on Health in Social Networks: A Response to Cohen-Cole and Fletcher and Trodson, Nonnemaker, and Pais.” Journal of Health Economics27:1400–5.
9.
GilettaMatteoScholteRon H. J.BurkWilliam J.EngelsRutger C. M. E.LarsenJunilla K.PrinsteinMitchell J.CiairanoSilvia. 2011. “Similarity in Depressive Symptoms in Adolescents’ Friendship Dyads: Selection or Socialization?” Developmental Psychology47:1804–14.
10.
GoodmanLeo A.1979. “Simple Models for the Analysis of Association in Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories.” Journal of the American Statistical Association74:537–52.
11.
GranovetterMark. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology78:1360–80.
12.
GranovetterMark. 1974. Getting a Job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
HsiaoCheng. 1986. The Analysis of Panel Data. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
14.
KandelDenise B.1978. “Homophily, Selection, and Socialization in Adolescent Friendships.” American Journal of Sociology84(2):427–36.
15.
LaumannEdward O.1973. Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: Wiley.
16.
LiangKung-YeeZegerScott. 1986.” Longitudinal Data Analysis Using Generalized Linear Models.” Biometrika73:13–22.
17.
MarsdenPeter. 2002. “Egocentric and Sociocentric Measures of Centrality.” Social Networks24:407–22.
18.
McPhersonMillerSmith-LovinLynnCookJames M.2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homphily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology27(1):415–44.
19.
NoelHansNyhanBrendan. 2011. “The ‘Unfriending’ Problem: The Consequences of Homophily in Friendship Retention for Causal Estimates of Social Influence.” Social Networks33:211–18.
20.
RaschGeorg. 1960. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Paedagogiske Institut.
21.
ShaliziCosma RohillaThomasAndrew C.2011. “Homophily and Contagion Are Generally Confounded in Observational Network Studies.” Sociological Methods and Research40:211–39.
22.
ShroutPatrickKandelDenise B.1981. “Analyzing the Property of the Dyads: Determinants of Similarity in Marijuana Use in Adolescents’ Friendship Dyads.” Sociological Methods and Research9:363–74.
23.
SnijdersTomSpreenMarinusZwaagstraRonald. 1995. “The Use of Multilevel Modeling for Analyzing Personal Networks.” Journal of Quantitative Anthropology5:85–105.
24.
TrogdonJustine G.NonnemakerJamesPaisJoanne. 2008. “Peer Effects in Adolescent Overweight.” Journal of Health Economics27(5):193–228.
25.
van DuijnMarijtje A. J.van BusschbachJooske T.SnijdersTom A. B.1999. “Multilevel Analysis of Personal Networks as Dependent Variables.” Social Networks21:187–209.
26.
WassermanStanleyFaustKatherine. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
27.
WassermanStanleyPattisonPhillipa E.1996. “Logit Models and Logistic Regressions for Social Networks I. An Introduction Markov Graphs and p*.” Psychometrika61:401–25.
28.
YamaguchiKazuo. 1990. “Homophily and Social Distance in the Choice of Multiple Friends: An Analysis Based on Conditionally Symmetric Log-Bilinear Association Models.” Journal of the American Statistical Association85:356–66.
29.
YamaguchiKazuo. 1996. “Some Log-Linear Fixed-Effect Latent-Trait Markov-Chain Models: A Dynamic Analysis of Personal Efficacy Under the Influence of Divorce/Widowhood.” Pp. 39–78 in Sociological Methodology, vol. 26, edited by RafteryA. E.Boston, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
30.
YamaguchiKazuoKandelDenise B.1993. “Marital Homophily and Illicit Drug Use among Young Adults: Assortative Mating or Marital Influence?” Social Forces72:505–28.
31.
YamaguchiKazuoKandelDenise B.1997. “The Influences of Spouses’ Behavior and Marital Dissolution on Marijuana Use: Causation or Selection?” Journal of Marriage and the Family59:22–36.
