***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
Previously, I posted for advice on Milgram's small world experiments.
Many thanks to all who replied.
To update colleagues.
Recall that the intention was to replicate Milgram's original experiment keeping as close as possible to his design. The experiment was carried out in collaboration with the BBC.
The headline results -
Out of 100 initial packages delivered: 22 successful completions;
Mean separation: 3.2 degrees.
This is not the place to go into details.
However, is this point worth following up?
Replicability is a major divide between physical and social sciences. Small world theories and experiments provide a good example of 'hard' social science. Should small world researchers adopt a standard research design and data collection schedule so as to ensure a constant framework for comparative and cumulative analyses?
This begs the question: are there any comparative studies or meta-analyses of empirical small world investigations?
Best wishes, nick
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.