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

In our current research, we are using the variables of structural holes
and cohesion.  We have two indicators of each.  I have questions about
how to aggregate each set of indicators and, based on this aggregated
measure, how to determine cutpoints for creating categories (e.g.
high/low).

FOR COHESION, we use indicators of egocentric density and mean strength
of ties (valued ties).
1)  What is the appropriate way to "aggregate" these two indicators for
cohesion into one measure?  Density is indexed 0 to 1, while mean
strength of ties has a range of 0-4.
2)  Based upon this aggregated measure, we need to first identify an
actor's cohesion as low vs. high.  We also need to be able to identify
the actors' cohesion into three categories:  low, medium, high.  What
are the appropriate methods for determining 1/2 and 1/3 cutpoints or
thresholds for cohesion?   Is is appropriate to use the mean or median?
Other suggestions would be appreciated.

FOR STRUCTURAL HOLES, we use efficiency and constraint.
1)  What is the appropriate way to "aggregate" these two indicators for
structural holes into one measure?  I assume we will need to somehow
reverse code the constraint indicator so that both indicators have a
positive association with structural holes.  Can we simply take an
average of the two?

2)  Based upon this aggregated measure, we need to first identify an
actor's use of structural holes as low vs. high.  We also need to be
able to identify the actors' cohesion into three categories:  low,
medium, high.  What are the appropriate methods for determining 1/2 and
1/3 cutpoints or thresholds for structural holes?   Is is appropriate
to use the mean or median?  Or, given the indicators are indexed 0 to
100, is it appropriate to use the half-way point of 50?  Other
suggestions would be appreciated.

If you have any suggestions for research that has been published that
Thanks,
Julie

Julie M. Hite
Brigham Young University