***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
you migth find it useful to have a look at the following paper:
Capaldo A. 2007. Network structure and innovation: The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management Journal 28: 585-608.
Prof. Antonio Capaldo, Ph.D.
Department of Management
Catholic University of the Sacred Heart
1, Largo Gemelli - Milan 20123 - IT
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Chung" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 3:35 AM
Subject: Measure of Ego Tie Strength
> ***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
> Dear colleagues,
> I am seeking ideas and suggestions on how one accounts for tie strength of
> an ego node, when you are studying over 100 ego nodes individually. In my
> study, relational data is collected from over 100 individuals, where each
> individual may elicit up to maximum 15 ties. The research model tests
> whether tie strength is associated with individual outcome, eg. attitude to
> Tie strength in my study is measured by:
> - closeness (4 point scale from very close to distant) and
> - frequency of contact (5 point scale ranging from daily to less often),
> although data on other variables such as 'time known' and 'relationship
> type' is also available.
> When it comes to calculation of tie strength for an ego node, how does one
> account for it? To the best of my knowledge and from what I've read from
> literature, one may
> 1. use the average strength of ties for an ego (ie. sum the values of each
> tie from ego to alter and divide by count of ties). In this case, the values
> of each tie may be:
> (i) the average of closeness and frequency values, or
> (ii) the product of closeness and frequency values
> 2. using 1, but take only the average of the top 5 or top 7 ties to the ego.
> This allows for comparison using a common baseline.
> Other approaches have been to consider tie strength of a node in terms of
> network proportions (see Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network
> Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range.
> Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 240-267.), however, I understand this
> only works for sociocentric networks and not for ego networks as in my
> I'd like to confirm whether my limited understanding is correct and welcome
> comments and suggestions from you all.
> Thank you,
> Kon Shing, Kenneth Chung
> PhD Candidate
> School of Information Technologies
> University of Sydney
> NSW 2006, Australia
> P: +61 2 9351 5639
> F: +61 2 9351 3838
> W: http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~ken
> 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.
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date: 03/06/2007 12.47
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.