1 Reading List

1.0.1 Week 1 (beg. September 20th): Introductions and Introduction to R

Required for Wednesday:

  • Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. science, 323(5916), 892-895.
  • Bott, E. (2017). Urban families: conjugal roles and social networks. In Man in Adaptation(pp. 76-104). Routledge.
  • Sewell, William Jr. (1992.) A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation. American Journal of Sociology 98, 1:1-29.
  • Hinde, R.A. (1976.) Interactions, Relationships and Social Structure. Man 11, 1: 1-17.
  • Before class, install R and RStudio, and work through this introductory tutorial on Datacamp: https://campus.datacamp.com/courses/free-introduction-to-r

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapter 1

1.0.2 Week 2 (beg. September 27th): Types of networks

For Monday:

Local networks:

  • McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears. 2006. “Social isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades (Links to an external site.).” American Sociological Review 71:353-375.
  • Salganik, Matthew. and Douglas Heckathorn (2004). Sampling and estimation in hidden populations using respondent-driven sampling. Sociological Methodology 34, 193–239.

One-mode networks:

  • A. Christakis and J. H. Fowler (2007) “The Spread of Obesity in a Large Network” New England Journal of Medicine 357:370-379.
  • Beckfield, Jason. 2010. “The Social Structure of the World Polity” American Journal of Sociology. 115:1018-1068.

Two-mode networks (and beyond!):

  • Breiger, R. L. 1974. “The Duality of Persons and Groups.” Social Forces 53:181- 90.
  • Fararo, T. J., & Doreian, P. (1984). Tripartite structural analysis: Generalizing the Breiger-Wilson formalism. Social Networks, 6(2), 141-175.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 1

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapters 2 & 4 (skim to get the gist of the jargon and notation)

Further Readings:

  • Granovetter, Mark. (1976). Network Sampling: Some First Steps. American Journal of Sociology 81(6), 1287–1303.
  • Moody, James. 2004. “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network” American Sociological Review 69:213-264.
  • Abbott, Andrew and E. Barman. 1997. “Sequence Comparison via Alignment and Gibbs Sampling.” Sociological Methodology 27:47-87.
  • Blau, Peter M. and Joseph E. Schwartz. 1997. Crosscutting Social Circles: Testing A Macrostructural Theory of Intergroup Relations. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction.
  • Fischer, Claude S. 2009. “Comment: The 2004 GSS Finding of Shrunken Social Networks: An Artifact? (Links to an external site.).” American Sociological Review 74:657-669.
  • McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears. 2009. “Reply: Models and Marginals: Using Survey Evidence to Study Social Networks.” American Sociological Review 74:670-681.
  • Lee, Byungkyu, and Peter Bearman. 2017. “Important Matters in Political Context.” Sociological Science 4: 1–30.
  • Anthony, Kenneth Sanchagrin 2013. “Social Isolation in America: An Artifact” American Sociological Review 2013 78:339-360
  • Small, Mario Luis (2013). Weak ties and the core discussion network: Why people regularly discuss important matters with unimportant alters. Social networks, 35(3), 470-483.
  • Frank, Kenneth, et. al “The Social Dynamics of Mathematics Course taking in High School” American Journal of Sociology.
  • McFarland, D. A., & Thomas, R. J. (2006). Bowling young: How youth voluntary associations influence adult political participation. American sociological review, 71(3), 401-425.
  • Chu, Johan SG, and Gerald F. Davis. “Who killed the inner circle? The decline of the American corporate interlock network.” American Journal of Sociology3 (2016): 714-754.

1.0.3 Week 3 (beg. October 4th): Triads, Balance and Hierarchy

Required for Monday:

  • Simmel, George. 1950. “The Triad” in Kurt Wolf (ed.), The Sociology of Georg Simmel, Free Press, 145‐169.
  • Gould, Roger. 2002. “The Origins of Status Hierarchies.” American Journal of Sociology 107: 1143:1178.
  • Cartwright, D., & Harary, F. (1956). Structural balance: a generalization of Heider’s theory. Psychological review, 63(5), 277.
  • Chase, I. D. (1982). Dynamics of Hierarchy Formation: the Sequential Development of Dominance Relationships. Behaviour 80(3-4), 218–239.
  • Johnson, Eugene. 1985. “Network Macrostructure Models for the Davis-Leinhardt set of empirical sociomatricies.” Social Networks

Required for Wednesday:

  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 2

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapters 6 & 14

Further Readings:

  • Moody, James and Douglas R. White. 2003. “Social Cohesion and Embeddedness.” American Sociological Review 68:103-127.
  • Moody, James (1998). Matrix methods for calculating the triad census. Social Networks, 20(4), 291-299.

1.0.4 Week 4 (beg. October 11th): Centrality, Power, and Inequality

Required for Monday:

  • Bonacich, Phillip. 1987. “Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures (Links to an external site.)” American Journal of Sociology 92:1170-118.
  • Feld, Scott. 1991. “Why Your Friends Have More Friends Than You Do.” American Journal of Sociology 96:1464-77.
  • Zerubavel, Noam et al. (2015.) Neural Mechanisms Tracking Popularity in Real-World Social Networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
  • Grossman, G., & Baldassarri, D. (2012). The impact of elections on cooperation: Evidence from a lab‐in‐the‐field experiment in Uganda. American journal of political science, 56(4), 964-985.
  • DiMaggio, Paul, & Garip, Feliz. (2012). Network effects and social inequality. Annual review of sociology, 38, 93-118.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Submit project research question and names of group members, if any (up to 3)

Further Readings:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapter 5
  • Zerubavel, N., et al. (2018). Neural precursors of future liking and affective reciprocity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(17), 4375-4380.
  • Friedkin, N. E. 1991. “Theoretical Foundations for Centrality Measures.” American Journal of Sociolgy 96:1478-504.
  • Liljeros, F., Edling, C. R., Amaral, L. A. N., Stanley, H. E., & Åberg, Y. (2001). The web of human sexual contacts. Nature, 411(6840), 907..
  • Albert, Réka, Hawoong Jeong, and Albert-László Barabási. 2000. “Error and attack tolerance of complex networks.” Nature 6794: 378.
  • Freeman, L. C. 1977. “A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness.” Sociometry 40:35-41.
  • Albert-László Barabási and Réka Albert. “Emergence of scaling in random networks.”Science, 286(5439), 509-512.
  • Cook, K. S., Emerson, R. M., Gillmore, M. R., & Yamagishi, T. (1983). The distribution of power in exchange networks: Theory and experimental results. American journal of sociology, 89(2), 275-305.

1.0.5 Week 5 (beg. October 18th): Connectivity and the Small World Problem

Required for Monday:

  • Travers, J. and S. Milgram. “An experimental study of the small world Problem” Sociometry 32:425-443
  • Watts, Duncan J. (1999) “Networks, Dynamics, and the Small-World Phenomenon” American Journal of Sociology. v. 105:493-527.
  • Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78:1360-1380.
  • Lee, Nancy H. (1969).The Search for an Abortionist (Links to an external site.): Preface, Chapter 1. (Available on Canvas).
  • Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American journal of sociology, 110(2), 349-399.
  • Park, Patrick, Joshua Blumenstock, and Michael Macy. 2018. “The Strength of Long-Range Ties in Population-Scale Social Networks.” Science 362(6421):1410-1413.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 4

Further Readings:

  • Schnettler, S. 2009. “A structured overview of 50 years of small-world research” Social Networks
  • Bailey, M., Cao, R., Kuchler, T., Stroebel, J., & Wong, A. (2018). Social connectedness: measurement, determinants, and effects. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(3), 259-80.
  • Uzzi, Brian and Jarrett Spiro. 2005. “Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem.” American Journal of Sociology 111:2, 447-504
  • Dodds et al. (2003). “An Experimental Study of Search in Social Networks”
  • Granovetter (2003). “Ignorance, Knowledge, and Outcomes in a Small World”
  • Granovetter, Mark.Getting a job: A study of contacts and careers. University of Chicago press, 2018.
  • Stovel, K., & Shaw, L. (2012). Brokerage. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 139-158.

1.0.6 Week 6 (beg. October 25th): Groups, Communities, and Homophily

Required for Monday:

  • Wimmer, Andreas and Kevin Lewis. 2010. “Beyond and Below Racial Homophily: ERG Models of a Friendship Network Documented on Facebook” American Journal of Sociology 116:583-642
  • Goodreau, S. M., Kitts, J. A., & Morris, M. (2009). Birds of a feather, or friend of a friend? Using exponential random graph models to investigate adolescent social networks.Demography, 46(1), 103-125.
  • McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M. Cook. 2001. ‘‘Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.’’ Annual Review of Sociology 27:415-44
  • McFarland, D. A., Moody, J., Diehl, D., Smith, J. A., & Thomas, R. J. (2014). Network ecology and adolescent social structure. American sociological review, 79(6), 1088-1121.
  • Shwed, Uri and Peter Bearman. “The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation”. American Sociological Review.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Newman, Mark E. J. 2006. “Modularity and Community Structure in Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (23): 8577–8582.
  • Robins, G., Pattison, P., Kalish, Y., & Lusher, D. (2007). An introduction to exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks.Social networks, 29(2), 173-191.
  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 5

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapter 7 (skim)

Further Readings:

  • Moody, James. 2001. ``Race, School Integration, and Friendship Segregation in America." American Journal of Sociology 107(3) 679:716
  • Centola, Damon. 2011. “An experimental study of homophily in the adoption of health behavior.”Science 606: 1269-1272.
  • Kandel, Denise B. 1978. “Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships.”American journal of Sociology 2: 427-436.
  • Rytina, Steve, and David L. Morgan 1982. ``The Arithmetic of Social Relations: The Interplay of Category and Network" American Journal of Sociology 88(1): 88‐113.
  • Boutyline, A., & Willer, R. (2017). The social structure of political echo chambers: Variation in ideological homophily in online networks. Political Psychology, 38(3), 551-569.

1.0.7 Week 7 (beg. November 1st): Categories and Positions

Required for Monday:

  • Nadel, A Theory of Social Structure Chapter 4.
  • White, H., S. Boorman, and R. Breiger. 1976. “Social Structure from multiple networks. I. Blockmodels of roles and positions.” American Journal of Sociology 81:730-779.
  • Padgett, J. F. and C. K. Ansell. 1993. “Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400-1434.” American Journal of Sociology 98:1259-319.
  • Bearman, P. 1997. “Generalized Exchange.” American Journal of Sociology 102:1383-1415.
  • Grover, A., & Leskovec, J. 2016. “node2vec: Scalable feature learning for networks.” InProceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 855-864.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 6

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust. Chapters 9 and 10.

Further Readings:

  • Munson, J. and M. Macri (2009). Sociopolitical network interactions: A case study of the Classic Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28(4), 424–438.
  • Brieger, Ronald L. 1976. Career Attributes and Network Structure: A Blockmodel Study of a Biomedical Research Specialty American Sociological Review, Vol. 41: 117-135.
  • Doreian, Patrick, Vladimir Batagelj, and Anuška Ferligoj. 2004. “Generalized blockmodeling of two-mode network data.”Social networks 26: 29-53.
  • Hillman, Henning. 2007. “Mediation in Multiple Networks: Elite Mobilization before the English Civil War” American Sociological Review.
  • Faust, Katherine. 1988. “Comparison of Methods for Positional Analysis: Structural and General Equivalences.” Social Networks 10: 313-341.

1.0.8 Week 8 (beg. November 8th): Networks from Culture and Culture from Networks

Required for Monday:

  • De Saussure, F. (1959). Course in general linguistics. Columbia University Press. Pages 1-37. https://monoskop.org/images/0/0b/Saussure_Ferdinand_de_Course_in_General_Linguistics_1959.pdf
  • Lee, Monica, & Martin, J. L. 2018. “Doorway to the Dharma of Duality.” Poetics, 68, 18-30.
  • Mohr, John W. 1998. “Measuring Meaning Structures.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 345-370.
  • Latour, B. (1992). 10 ‘‘Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts’’.
  • Hoffman, M. A. (2019). The Materiality of Ideology: Cultural Consumption and Political Thought after the American Revolution. American Journal of Sociology, 125(1), 1-62.
  • Goldberg, Amir. 2011. “Mapping shared understandings using relational class analysis: The case of the cultural omnivore reexamined.”American Journal of Sociology 5: 1397-1436.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Complete and bring to class lab assignment from week 7

Optional:

  • Wasserman and Faust, Chapter 8 (skim)

Further Readings:

  • Schultz, J., & Breiger, R. L. (2010). The strength of weak culture. Poetics, 38(6), 610-624.
  • Mische, Ann, and Philippa Pattison. 2000. “Composing a civic arena: Publics, projects, and social settings.” Poetics2-3: 163-194.
  • DiMaggio, Paul, et al. 2018. “Culture out of attitudes: Relationality, population heterogeneity and attitudes toward science and religion in the US.”Poetics 68 (2018): 31-51.
  • Lizardo, O. (2006). How cultural tastes shape personal networks. American sociological review, 71(5), 778-807.
  • Boutyline, Andrei, and Stephen Vaisey. “Belief network analysis: A relational approach to understanding the structure of attitudes.”American Journal of Sociology 5 (2017): 1371-1447.
  • Baldassarri, D., & Goldberg, A. (2014). Neither ideologues nor agnostics: Alternative voters’ belief system in an age of partisan politics. American Journal of Sociology, 120(1), 45-95.
  • De Vaan, M., Stark, D., & Vedres, B. (2015). Game changer: The topology of creativity. American Journal of Sociology, 120(4), 1144-1194.
  • Hoffman, M. A., Cointet, J. P., Brandt, P., Key, N., & Bearman, P. (2018). The (Protestant) Bible, the (printed) sermon, and the word (s): The semantic structure of the Conformist and Dissenting Bible, 1660–1780. Poetics, 68, 89-103.
  • Roth, C., & Cointet, J. P. (2010). Social and semantic coevolution in knowledge networks. Social Networks, 32(1), 16-29.
  • Rule, A., Cointet, J. P., & Bearman, P. S. (2015). Lexical shifts, substantive changes, and continuity in State of the Union discourse, 1790–2014. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(35), 10837-10844.
  • Martin, J. L. (2000). What do animals do all day?: The division of labor, class bodies, and totemic thinking in the popular imagination. Poetics, 27(2-3), 195-231.
  • Erikson, E. (2013). Formalist and relationalist theory in social network analysis. Sociological Theory, 31(3), 219-242.
  • Martin, J. L. (2002).“Power, Authority, and the Constraint of Belief Systems.” American Journal of Sociology 107: 861-904.
  • Bail, C. A. (2016). Combining natural language processing and network analysis to examine how advocacy organizations stimulate conversation on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(42), 11823-11828.

1.0.9 Week 9 (beg. November 15th): Dynamics and Diffusion

Required for Monday:

  • Granovetter, M. (1978). Threshold models of collective behavior. American journal of sociology, 83(6), 1420-1443.
  • Morris, M., & Kretzschmar, M. (1997). Concurrent partnerships and the spread of HIV. Aids, 11(5), 641-648.
  • Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American journal of Sociology, 113(3), 702-734.
  • Buskens, V & van de Rijt, Arnout “Dynamics of Networks if Everyone Strives for Structural Holes” American Journal of Sociology
  • Paluck, Elizabeth Levy, Hana Shepherd, and Peter M. Aronow. “Changing climates of conflict: A social network experiment in 56 schools.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences3 (2016): 566-571.
  • Goldberg, A., & Stein, S. K. (2018). Beyond social contagion: Associative diffusion and the emergence of cultural variation. American Sociological Review, 83(5), 897-932.

Required for Wednesday:

  • Snijders, T.A.B. , van de Bunt, G.Gb, Steglich, C.E.G. 2010.”Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics” Social Networks. 32: 44-60
  • Moody, James, Daniel A. McFarland and Skye Bender-DeMoll. 2005. “Dynamic Network Visualization: Methods for Meaning with Longitudinal Network Movies.” American Journal of Sociology 110:1206-1241

Further Readings:

  • Coleman, James, Elihu Katz, and Herbert Menzel. 1957. “The diffusion of an innovation among physicians.” Sociometry 20:253-270.
  • Banerjee, Abhijit, Arun G. Chandrasekhar, Esther Duflo, and Matthew O. Jackson. “The diffusion of microfinance.” Science 341, no. 6144 (2013): 1236498.
  • Burt, Ronald S. 1987. “Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion Versus Structural Equivalence.” American Journal of Sociology 92: 1287-1335.
  • Sotoudeh, Ramina, Kathleen Mullan Harris, and Dalton Conley. “Effects of the peer metagenomic environment on smoking behavior.”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 33 (2019): 16302-16307.
  • Stark, David and Vedres, Balázs, 2006. “Social Times of Network Spaces: Network Sequences and Foreign Investment in Hungary.” American Journal of Sociology 111(5):1367-1411.
  • Wang, Dan J.; Sarah A. Soule. 2012. “Social Movement Organizational Collaboration: Networks of Learning and the Diffusion of Protest Tactics, 1960–1995” American Journal of Sociology. 117:1674-1722
  • DellaPosta, D., Shi, Y., & Macy, M. (2015). Why do liberals drink lattes? American Journal of Sociology, 120(5), 1473-1511.
  • Centola, Damon. 2010. “The Spread of Behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment” Science 2010: 1194-1197.

1.0.10 Week 9 and 3/4: Thanksgiving!

1.0.11 Week 10 (beg. November 29th): Presentations of Research

1.0.12 December 11th: Final papers are due.