LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for SOCNET Archives


SOCNET Archives

SOCNET Archives


SOCNET@LISTS.UFL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SOCNET Home

SOCNET Home

SOCNET  January 2005

SOCNET January 2005

Subject:

Re: Network Similarity and Language Use

From:

"Ronald E. Rice" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Ronald E. Rice

Date:

Sat, 8 Jan 2005 17:29:49 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (308 lines)

*****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****

Here's some summariziation of semantic network analysis and related
approaches that have treated of the underlying issue you are getting at,
with various operationalizations in each:


            The essence of semantic network analysis is rather
straightforward (Danowski, 1988). Text is analyzed to determine some measure
of the extent to which words are related, which indicates something about
their meaning.  One measure of this relationship is the extent to which word
pairs co-occur within a given meaning unit.  Then, this measure of
relatedness across a set of words is used to group, cluster, or scale the
words (or some subset, such as the more frequently used words).  These
clusters can be directly interpreted, or used to derive more quantitative
measures for use in other analyses, or bases for formal content analysis.
Network approaches have been applied to the study of semantic memory and
association processes (Chang, 1986; Collins & Quillian, 1969; Flores-d'Arcais
& Schreuder, 1987), information retrieval algorithms and systems (Savoy,
1992), citation analysis (Callon, Courtial, Turner, & Bauin, 1983; Danowski
& Martin, 1979; Lievrouw, Rogers, Lowe, & Nadel, 1987; and Rice & Crawford,
1992), content analysis of traditional and CMC media (Cuilenburg,
Kleinnijenhuis, & de Ridder, 1986; Danowski, 1982), and responses to
open-ended survey questions (Carley & Palmquist, 1992; Rice & Danowski,
1993). Semantic network analysis using has been applied to understanding
positioning of candidates and issues in presidential debates (Doerfel &
Marsh, 2003), and the structure of interests in the International
Communication Association (Doerfel & Barnett, 1999), among other topics.
These and other prior studies provide the underlying arguments about
representing cognition and meaning through content associations.



Callon, M., Courtial, J-P., Turner, W., & Bauin, S. (1983).  From
translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis.
Social Science Information, 2, 191-235.

Carley, K., & Palmquist, M. (1992).  Extracting, representing and analyzing
mental models.  Social Forces, 70, 601-636.

Chang, T.M. (1986).  Semantic memory:  Facts and models.  Psychological
Bulletin, 99, 199-220.

Collins, A.M., & Quillian, M.R. (1969).  Retrieval time from semantic
memory.  Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240-247.

Consalvo, M., Baym, N., Hunsinger, J., Jensen, K.B., Logie, J., Murero, M. &
Shade, L.R. (Eds.). (2004). Internet research annual, vol. 1: Selected
papers from the Association of Internet Researchers conferences 2000-2002.
New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Cuilenburg, J.J. van, Kleinnijenhuis, J., & de Ridder, J.A. (1986).  A
theory of evaluative discourse: Towards a graph theory of journalistic
texts. European Journal of Communication, 1, 65-96.

Danowski, J. (1982).  A network-based content analysis methodology for
computer-mediated communication:  An illustration with a computer bulletin
board. In R. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 6 (pp.  904-925).  New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

Danowski, J. (1988). Organizational infographics and automated auditing:
Using computers to unobtrusively gather and analyze communication.  In G.
Goldhaber & G. Barnett (Eds.),  Handbook of organizational communication
(pp. 385-434).  Norwood, NJ:  Ablex.

Danowski, J.A. & Martin, T.H. (1979).  Evaluating the health of Information
Science:  Research community and user contexts. (Contract No. IST78-21130).
Washington, DC:  National Science Foundation.

Doerfel, M. L. & Barnett, G. A. (1999). A semantic network analysis of the
international communication association. Human Communication Research, 25
(4), 589-603.

Doerfel, M. L., & Marsh, P. S. (2003). Candidate-issue positioning in the
context of presidential debates. Journal of Applied Communication Research,
31, 212-237.

Flores-d'Arcais, G.B., & Schreuder, R. (1987).  Semantic activation during
object naming.  Psychological Research, 49, 153-159.

Jones, S. (2004).  Imaging an association.  In M. Consalvo, N. Baym, J.
Hunsinger, K.B. Jensen, J. Logie, M. Murero, & L.R. Shade (Eds.). (2004).
Internet research annual, vol. 1: Selected papers from the Association of
Internet Researchers conferences 2000-2002. (in press). New York, NY: Peter
Lang.

Lievrouw, L., Rogers, E.M., Lowe, C.U., & Nadel, E. (1987). Triangulation as
a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical
scientists.  Social Networks, 9, 217-248.

Rice, R.E., & Crawford, G. (1992).  Context and content of citations between
communication and library and information science articles.  In J. Schement
& B. Ruben (Eds.), Information and behavior 4 (pp. 189-217). New Brunswick,
NJ: Transaction Press.

Rice, R. E., & Danowski, J. (1993).  Is it really just like a fancy
answering machine? Comparing semantic networks of different types of voice
mail users.  Journal of Business Communication, 30(4), 369-397.

Savoy, J. (1992).  Bayesian inference networks and spreading activation in
hypertext systems.  Information Processing and Management, 28, 389-406.

Woelfel, J. (1991).  CatPac [Computer program]. Buffalo, NY: New York State
University, Department of Communication.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following are some references I retrieved from the Ingenta, using author
names I'm familiar with, and terms such as "semantic network analysis" or
"semantic networks", along with some brief thoughts for why each might be
relevant.



Monge and Contractor have developed a specific application/meaning for
semantic network analysis.  They argue that patterns of similarity in word
use, or interpretations of meanings (such as corporate mission statements)
should be associated with patterns of similarity in network/communication
relations.  I.e., you could have an affiliation matrix of people by
words/themes and then convert that into a people by people matrix, and then
test for an association of that with a people by people communication
network matrix. Thus, shared meaning could also be the basis for influencing
the development of network relations, such as in a knowledge management
system.   Some of these may discuss some of those concepts and results:

Managing Knowledge Networks. Authors: Contractor, N. S.; Monge, P. R.
Source: Management Communication Quarterly, November 2002, vol. 16, no. 2,
pp. 249-258.

Communication and Motivational Predictors of the Dynamics of Organizational
Innovation. Authors: Monge, Peter R.; Cozzens, Michael D.; Contractor,
Noshir S. Source: Organization science, 1992 , vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 250.

Network Theory and Small Groups. Authors: Katz, N.; Lazer, D.; Arrow, H.;
Contractor, N. Source: Small Group Research, June 2004, vol. 35, no. 3, pp.
307-332.

Information Systems Division: Intrapersonal, Meaning, Attitude, and Social
Systems. Authors: Shapiro, M. A.; Lang, A.; Hamilton, M. A.; Contractor, N.
S. Source: Communication Yearbook, 2001 , vol. 24, pp. 17-50.

Formal and Emergent Predictors of Coworkers' Perceptual Congruence on an
Organization's Social Structure. Authors: Heald, Maureen R.; Contractor,
Noshir S.; Wasserman, Stanley.

Source: Human communication research, 1998 , vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 536.

Interactional Influence in the Structuring of Media Use in Groups: Influence
in Members' Perceptions of Group Decision Support System Use. Authors:
Contractor, Noshir S.; Seibold, David R.; Heller, Mark A. Source: Human
communication research, 1996 , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 451.

Strategic Ambiguity in the Birth of a Loosely Coupled Organization: The Case
of a $50-Million Experiment. Authors: Contractor, Noshir S.; Ehrlich,
Matthew C. Source: Management communication quarterly, 1993 , vol. 6, no. 3,
pp. 251.

Structural Position and Perceived Similarity. Authors: Michaelson, Alaina;
Contractor, Noshir S. Source: Social psychology quarterly, 1992 , vol. 55,
no. 3, pp. 300.

The Use of Semantic Network Analysis to Manage Customer Complaints. Authors:
Fitzgerald, G. A.; Doerfel, M. L. Source: Communication Research Reports,
2004 , vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 231-242.

Semantic Connectivity: An Approach for Analyzing Symbols in Semantic
Networks. Authors: Carley, Kathleen M.; Kaufer, David S. Source:
Communication theory, 1993 , vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 183.

Intersubjective Semantic Meanings Emergent in a Work Group: A Neural Network
Content Analysis of Voice Mail. Authors: Sherblom, J. C.; Reinsch, N. L.;
Beswick, R. W. Source: Progress in Communication Sciences, 2001, no. 17, pp.
33-50.

European Managers' Interpretations of Participation: A Semantic Network
Analysis. Author: Stohl, Cynthia. Source: Human communication research, 1993
, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 97.

Accuracy of Metrics for Inferring Trust and Reputation in Semantic Web-Based
Social Networks. Authors: Golbeck, J.; Hendler, J. Source: Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, 2004, no. 3257, pp. 116-131.

Visualisation of Semantic Networks and Ontologies Using AutoCAD. Authors:
Mesina, M.; Roller, D.; Lampasona, C. Source: Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, 2004, no. 3190, pp. 21-29

Measuring Semantic Similarity Between Words Using Lexical Knowledge and
Neural Networks.

Authors: Li, Y.; Bandar, Z.; Mclean, D. Source: Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, 2002, no. 2412, pp. 111-116.

Semantic Networks in a Knowledge Management Portal. Author: Lebeth, K.
Source: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2001, no. 2174, pp. 463-466.

[these might be a good overview of the relation between cognitive maps and
semantic networks]

Cognitive Mapping Meets Semantic Networks. Author: Young, Michael D. Source:
The journal of conflict resolution, 1996 , vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 395.

A Conceptual Space Approach to Semantic Networks. Author: Hautamaki, A.
Source: Computers & mathematics with applications, 1992 , vol. 23, no. 6/9,
pp. 517.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

======================================
Ronald E. Rice
Arthur N. Rupe Endowed Professor
Dept. of Communication, University of California
Incoming President of the International Communication Association
Co-Director, Center for Film, Television and New Media
Santa Barbara, CA 91306-4020
ph: 805-893-8696; fax: 805-893-7102
[log in to unmask]
http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/rice_flash.htm
http://www.cftnm.ucsb.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: "JosŤ Garrois" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 5:11 PM
Subject: Network Similarity and Language Use


> *****  To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org  *****
>
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> I'm carrying out a social network study on language use in an electronic
> community. Data are drawn from the email archive containing all the
> messages exchanged among community members.
>
>
>
> The study hypothesizes a positive relationship between network similarity
> and  similarity in language use.
>
>
> I organized my data as following:
>
>
>
> -First, I divided the archive into 60 topic-specific email subsets (groups
> of emails on the same topic);
>
> -Second, for each of the 60 email subsets I built a two-mode matrix (ROWS
> = community members which sent or recieved at least one email on that
> topic; COLUMNS = email sent on that topic).
>
> -Third, I computed with UCINET VI a meaure of similarity among the columns
> of those 60 two-mode matrices. So, I got 60 square mail-x-mail matrices,
> where xij = value of network similarity between email i and email j. I
> call those matrices "Network-Similarity Matrices".
>
> -Fourth, I have other 60 square mail-x-mail matrices (one for each
> topic-specific subset), where xij = value of similarity between the TEXT
> of email i and the TEXT of email j. I call those matrices "Text-Similarity
> Matrices".
>
>
>
> Now, in order to test the relationship hypothesized above, I would like to
> do the following:
>
>
>
> -Building two diagonal matrices. The first one should have all the
> "network similarity matrices" on the diagonal and structural zeros
> elsewhere. The second one should be exactly the same with the "text
> similarity matrices" on the diagonal.
>
> -Run a QAP regression using those two big diagonal matrices as inputs.
>
>
>
> May I kindly ask you an opinion on these last two steps of my analysis? Do
> they make sense to you and what kind of weaknesses do you notice? Do you
> know other studies adopting a similar approach?
>
>
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
> JosŤ De Fatima Garrois
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
> network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
> an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
> UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.
>

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008, Week 62
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager