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  March 2011

SOCNET March 2011

Subject:

Re: Measuring contagion in longitudinal behavior data

From:

Sinan Aral <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:52:18 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (139 lines)

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

Arun,

I agree. Important and useful research begins with the right questions - 
that goes without saying.

But the problem of looking under the lamp post is not solely a problem 
of RCTs. The same problem arises when we consider what observational 
data we have access to. In fact, it seems likely that this problem would 
be more pronounced for observational data that we happen to get access 
to than for experimental studies that we have to design explicitly and 
in advance in order to examine a particular question or set of questions.

That we should use theory and scholarly intuition to seek out 
interesting questions and phenomena to study is clear. However, in this 
case, the value of the "question" of estimating social influence 
(broadly defined) is already quite clear and its relevance is relatively 
well accepted. The reason why causal estimation is important in this 
already well defined research area (and people have been writing about 
this for decades) is that separating correlation from causation in this 
specific case can inform us about what the effects of various policy 
alternatives might be for programs aimed at peer to peer HIV prevention, 
smoking cessation, obesity prevention, product marketing, and so on.

I could not agree more that the study that finds a valid instrument and 
then searches for the question that the instrument helps address is 
misguided. But, it doesn't seem to me that finding novel solutions to 
causal estimation in networks leads us to the question of estimating the 
magnitude of peer effects. In most contexts, that question itself is 
already well motivated. To the contrary, it seems to me that our methods 
lag behind the theoretical development of the questions (and the 
theories that explain social influence) in this case.

Another danger, besides looking under the lamp post, is remaining 
content with showing correlation and assuming causation. Based on your 
own previous work and our previous work together, I know you believe 
this as well. But, its worth repeating in order to extend this 
discussion a bit I think.

Cheers,

Sinan

Sinan Aral
Assistant Professor, NYU Stern School of Business.
Research Affiliate, MIT Sloan School of Management.
Personal Webpage:http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~saral
SSRN Page:http://ssrn.com/author=110270
WIN Workshop:http://www.winworkshop.net
Twitter:http://twitter.com/sinanaral


On 2/28/2011 11:36 PM, Arun Sundararajan wrote:
> *****  To join INSNA, visithttp://www.insna.org   *****
>
> The Onion clip is wonderful. Very much in snyc with the fake news
> often being more informative than the real...should be required
> viewing.
>
> It seems to say a lot more than just "give observational data a
> chance" to me in the context of this larger discussion. it isn't
> merely that a large fraction of the phenomena we want to study occur
> before we can design trials to measure them (and economists have been
> dealing with this reality for decades). or that observational data are
> more likely to lead to interesting discoveries of new things. Or that
> whatever the methods, there are always alternative explanations,
> especially when dealing with people in social settings. It's also that
> if we start to believe in experiments and RCT's as the holy grail,
> there's a danger of focusing too much on the kinds of questions that
> lend themselves to that specific methodology, rather than going after
> the ones that matter. (Even in the context of social influence in
> networks.) analogously, there's a lot of time spent by research in
> economics and marketing looking for "natural experiments" for
> identification, and this gets to the point sometimes where it seems
> like the research question was designed merely to exploit the cool
> natural experiment...
>
> i think that many aspects of this RCT vs. observational data (or for
> observational data, matched-sample versus "structural" methods for
> claiming causation) debates aren't unique to the context of social
> influence in networks. For example:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial#Relative_importance_of_RCTs_and_observational_studies
>
> cheers, Arun.
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 12:40 AM, James Fowler<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>> *****  To join INSNA, visithttp://www.insna.org    *****
>>
>> We have also relied on methods like the ones Tom Valente mentioned in many
>> of our observational studies, and we summarize the pluses and minuses of
>> this approach in a new paper here:
>>
>> http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/examining_dynamic_social_networks.pdf
>>
>> I also in principle like the actor-oriented model approach of Siena, but in
>> the past I could never get the model to converge for networks larger than
>> 1000 nodes (this might be my own failing, though, as there is always a bit
>> of art to getting models like that to work).
>>
>> We also have relied on experiments like this one in PNAS:
>>
>> http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/cooperative_behavior_cascades.pdf
>>
>> and I am a big fan of David Nickerson's voter experiment and Sinan's new
>> RCT.
>>
>> But I would resist abandoning evidence from observational studies.
>>
>> The resistance to observational studies reminds me of this Onion story:
>>
>> Multiple Stab Wounds May Be Harmful To Monkeys
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6CSIFi78Nw
>>
>> :)
>>
>> j
>>
>> James H. Fowler
>> Professor of Medical Genetics and Political Science
>> UC San Diego
>> http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu
>>
>> CONNECTED
>> http://connectedthebook.com
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
>> network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
>> an email message [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

April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
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