Archive for the ‘Social Networks’ Category

Political Networks Conference & Workshops

January 31, 2011

4th Annual Political Networks Conference and Workshops

Call for Papers

The 4th Annual Political Networks Conference and Workshops will be held June 14-18, 2011 at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.  Approximately 150-200 political networks scholars from around the world are expected to be in attendance.

The study of political networks serves a key role in understanding governance, as politics is largely driven by relationships between actors, agencies, and institutions. A greater recognition of these relationships has begun to change the study of politics.  We are soliciting papers that apply network ideas, from substantive insights to methodological innovations, to topics related to American politics, international relations, comparative politics, political theory, public administration, political methodology, or other areas of politics.  We are particularly interested in proposals that are not only descriptive, but that also make causal claims with clear identification strategies.   Submissions are encouraged from a wide range of disciplines and interdisciplinary fields including, but not limited to, political science, sociology, economics, public policy, anthropology, psychology, business, information systems, mathematics, physics, and complex systems.

The full conference will kick off on June 16  with an opening reception and keynote address by Garry Robins, University of Melbourne.  A full schedule of panel presentations begins on June 17 and 18.  Mark Newman of the University of Michigan will give the plenary address on June 17.

Due to the success of the workshop sessions held in prior years at Harvard and Duke, workshop offerings at this year?s event have been expanded. The first three days will be devoted to didactic sessions on network methodology by leading experts in the field, including Garry Robins, Steve Borgatti, Mark Newman, Carter Butts, David Siegel, Meredith Rolfe, and Michael Heaney.

Sessions are scheduled as follows:

  • June 14: Beginning Workshop on Network Analysis (assumes no prior training)
  • June 15: Computer Applications in Network Analysis
  • June 16: Specialized Workshops in Network Analysis and Keynote Address (5pm)
  • June 17: Conference Panels, Plenary Address, and Poster Session
  • June 18: Conference Panels, Plenary Panel, and Business Meeting

Key Deadlines:

  • March 15: Deadline for proposals
  • April 1: Invitations to conference announced
  • April 15: Deadline to confirm or decline invitations
  • May 1: Deadline for early registration

NSF-funded fellowships are available to support graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty to attend the conference and workshops.  Scholars and students from outside the U.S. are also eligible to apply.  The fellowship amount will be pro-rated to cover the number of workshop days.  Conference attendance is required for all fellowship recipients.

To submit a proposal, register, apply for funding, find accommodations, or obtain other information, please visit

Additionally, the 4th Annual Political Networks Conference and Workshops will be held immediately prior to the beginning of the ICPSR Summer Program at the University of Michigan.

There are two ICPSR opportunities that may be of interest to conference participants. First, ICPSR is offering a one-week course (June 20-24) on Advanced Network Analysis, which will provide an overview of how to handle and analyze very large-scale network data, such as Federal Elections Commission and Twitter data.  Fellowships of up to $1,000 will be available to political networks conference attendees, who wish to attend this seminar as well. More information about this ICPSR course is available at

Second, ICPSR is offering a four-week course (June 20-July 15) on Network Analysis. More information about this ICPSR course is available at

Plan to come to the 4th Annual Political Networks Conference and Workshops, June 14-18, 2011, and stay in Ann Arbor for a summer of training in networks through the ICPSR Summer Program.

Program Co-Chairs

2011 SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis

January 25, 2011

Edited by Carrington and Scott, coming out soon. Here’s the list of chapters:

1. Introduction Peter J. Carrington and John Scott
2. Social Network Analysis: An Introduction Alexandra Marin and Barry Wellman
3. The Development of Social Network Analysis-with an Emphasis on Recent Events Linton C Freeman
4. Network Theory Stephen P Borgatti and Virginie Lopez-Kidwell
5. Social Physics and Social Networks John Scott
6. Social Networks in Economics Sanjeev Goyal
7. Relational Sociology, Culture, and Agency Ann Mische
8. Personal Communities: The World According To Me Vincent Chua, Julia Madej and Barry Wellman
9. Social Support Lijun Song, Joonmo Son and Nan Lin
10. Kinship, Class, and Community Douglas R White
11. Animal Social Networks Katherine Faust
12. Networking Online: Cybercommunities Anatoliy Gruzd and Caroline Haythornthwaite
13. Corporate Elites and Intercorporate Networks William K Carroll and J P Sapinski
14. Political Dimensions of Corporate Connections Matthew Bond and Nicholas Harrigan
15. Policy Networks David Knoke
16. Social Movements and Collective Action Mario Diani
17. Crime and Social Network Analysis Peter J Carrington
18. Terrorist Networks: The Threat of Connectivity Renée C van der Hulst
19. Scientific and Scholarly Networks Howard D White
20. Cultural Networks Paul DiMaggio
21. Social Networks, Geography, and Neighbourhood Effects Ron Johnston and Charles Pattie
22. A Multiple-Network Analysis of the World System of Nations, 1995-1999 Edward L Kick, Laura A McKinney, Steve McDonald, Andrew Jorgenson
23. A Brief Introduction to Analyzing Social Network Data Robert A Hanneman and Mark Riddle
24. Concepts and Measures for Basic Network Analysis Robert A Hanneman and Mark Riddle
25. Survey Methods for Network Data Peter V Marsden
26. Survey Sampling in Networks Ove Frank
27. Qualitative Approaches Betina Hollstein
28. Analyzing Affiliation Networks Stephen P Borgatti and Daniel S Halgin
29. Positions and Roles Anuška Ferligoj, Patrick Doreian and Vladimir Batagelj
30. Relation Algebras and Social Networks Philippa Pattison
31. Statistical Models For Ties and Actors Marijtje A J van Duijn and Mark Huisman
32. Exponential Random Graph Models for Social Networks Garry Robins
33. Network Dynamics Tom A B Snijders
34. Models and Methods to Identify Peer Effects Weihua An
35. Kinship Network Analysis Klaus Hamberger, Michael Houseman and Douglas R White
36. Large-Scale Network Analysis Vladimir Batagelj
37. Network Visualization Lothar Krempel
38. A Reader’s Guide to SNA Software Mark Huisman and Marijtje A J van Duijn

Link to the advertisement:

Scott_HB of Social Network Analysis dis Compatibility Mode (2)

Ritualistic Science

April 18, 2010

Much of “science” today is not so much scientific as scientistic. That means that the forms and behaviors of science are used, but the underlying logic is missing. Scientism is very much like the phenomenon of cargo cults, in which Pacific islanders built airports and control towers out of wood in order to bring back the planes that came with World War II. They didn’t realize that air traffic control panels actually did something, so they simply built facsimiles out of wood.

We can see scientism in every aspect of published research today. We see it in papers that think that theory is a set of interconnected hypotheses, rather than as the reason why X leads to Y. We see it in work in which each hypothesis is justified by a collection of independent, even mutually contradictory, reasons why the hypothesis must be true. Instead of the hypotheses being tests of an underlying theory, the hypotheses are the principal claims of the theory, and the justifications for these hypothesis can be a smorgasbord of ideas that embody entirely different theories.

Another aspect of scientism is the belief that there are universal best practices in research that are independent of the research question and the research setting. As a result, there is a great deal of argumentation from authority. E.g., we use this measure because so and so did. We even see it used to justify hypothesis: we expect X to lead to Y because so-and-so said it would.

A tiny example of this ritualistic belief in best practices can be found in network analysis where people argue that certain variables *must* be collected. For example, it has been claimed that in organizational network research, every study must measure the “workflow” network, which indicates who is required to interact with whom because of the nature of their jobs. The idea is that this set of ties can determine many other ties, such as interaction, and so must be taken account of, regardless of the study objectives.

To borrow a page from the scientistic consider the following counter-argument from authority. Ron Burt is a major luminary in the field who has published more than 100 papers on dozens of research projects. How many of these included the workflow network? None. Mark Granovetter is also a major luminary. Does his work take account of the workflow network? No. What about Jim Coleman? Brian Uzzi? Jim Moody? Woody Powell? Anybody?

Graduate students need to be inoculated to generate antibodies against any prescription of this kind. The moment someone says “you can’t do meaningful research unless you include < insert favorite variable >” your scientific spider sense should start tingling and you should become wary. Such rules serve to replace and obviate the need for thought.

Apple’s negative ties

April 17, 2010

Dan Halgin pointed this out to me. I wish they had included Adobe and Amazon as well:

Duke Political Networks Conference May 19-21, 2010

April 17, 2010

Dear Networkers,

The program for the upcoming Duke Political Networks Conference has been posted online at

Please check your role at the conference and bring any concerns to my attention as soon as possible.

Our guaranteed rate of $129 per night at the Washington Duke Inn and Golf Club is ending on Sunday, April 18. For more information about hotel and travel, go to

We are still working out the details for the online paper archive where the papers will be posted. We are asking that papers be posted by Wednesday, May 12, one week before the start of the conference. I hope to send out the instructions for uploading the papers shortly.

If you have not yet registered, please do so ASAP at

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about program or Mike Ward ( if you have any questions about logistics or other hosting arrangements.

We very much look forward to seeing you soon at the 3rd Annual Political Networks Conference.


Michael T. Heaney, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies & Political Science
University of Michigan
722 Dennison Building
500 Church Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1042
Cell phone: 202-236-3369

NIH grants for social network analysis

March 25, 2010

Please note that the following announcement is available through additional funding mechanisms as an R21 (

Department of Health and Human Services

Participating Organizations
National Institutes of Health (NIH), (

Components of Participating Organizations
Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR), (
National Cancer Institute (NCI), (
National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), (
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), (
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), (
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), (
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), (
National Institute on Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR), (
National Institute on Aging (NIA), (
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), (

Title:  Social Network Analysis and Health (R01)

Announcement Type

Program Announcement (PA) Number: PAR10-145

NOTICE: Applications submitted in response to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for Federal assistance must be submitted electronically through ( using the SF424 Research and Related (R&R) forms and the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.


This FOA must be read in conjunction with the application guidelines included with this announcement in for Grants (hereafter called

A registration process is necessary before submission and applicants are highly encouraged to start the process at least four (4) weeks prior to the grant submission date. See Section IV.

Top of Form

A compatible version of Adobe Reader is required for download. For Assistance downloading this or any application package, please contact Customer Support at

Bottom of Form

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number(s)
93.399, 93.837, 93.273, 93.865, 93.279, 93.242, 93.121, 93.866. 93.859

Key Dates
Release/Posted Date: March 19, 2010
Opening Date:  May 3, 2010 (Earliest date an application may be submitted to
Letters of Intent Receipt Date(s): May 3, 2010; April 11, 2011; April 11, 2012
NOTE: On-time submission requires that applications be successfully submitted to no later than 5:00 p.m. local time (of the applicant institution/organization).
Application Due Date(s): June 3, 2010; May 11, 2011; May 11, 2012
AIDS Application Due Date(s): Not Applicable
Peer Review Date(s): October 2010, October 2011, October 2012
Council Review Date(s): January 2010, January 2011, January 2012
Earliest Anticipated Start Date(s): April 2011
Additional Information To Be Available Date (Activation Date): Not Applicable
Expiration Date: May 12, 2012

Due Dates for E.O. 12372
Not Applicable

Additional Overview Content

Executive Summary

  • Purpose. This FOA encourages research that aims to accomplish one or more specific goals: (1) generate new theories that would enhance the capabilities and value of Social Network Analysis (SNA); (2) address fundamental questions about social interactions and processes in social networks; (3) address fundamental questions about social networks in relation to health and health-related behaviors; (4) develop innovative methodologies and technologies to facilitate, improve, and expand the capabilities of SNA.
  • Mechanism of Support. This FOA will utilize the R01 grant mechanism and runs in parallel with a FOA of identical scientific scope, PAR-10-146, that encourages applications under the R21 grant mechanism.
  • Funds Available and Anticipated Number of Awards. Because the nature and scope of the proposed research will vary from application to application, it is anticipated that the size and duration of each award will also vary. The total amount awarded and the number of awards will depend upon the mechanism numbers, quality, duration, and costs of the applications received.
  • Budget and Project Period. The total project period for an application submitted in response to this funding opportunity may not exceed 5 years. Applicants for an R01 award are not limited in dollars but need to reflect the actual needs of the proposed project.
  • Application Research Strategy Length. The R01 Research Strategy section may not exceed 12 pages, including tables, graphs, figures, diagrams, and charts.    See Table of Page Limits.
  • Eligible Institutions/Organizations. Institutions/organizations listed in Section III, 1.A. are eligible to apply.
  • Eligible Project Directors/Principal Investigators (PDs/PIs). Individuals with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research are invited to work with their institution/organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.
  • Number of PDs/PIs. More than one PD/PI (i.e., multiple PDs/PIs) may be designated on the application.
  • Number of Applications. Applicants may submit more than one application, provided that each application is scientifically distinct.
  • Resubmissions. Applicants may submit a resubmission application, but such application must include an Introduction addressing the previous peer review critique (Summary Statement). See new NIH policy on resubmission (amended) applications (NOT-OD-09-003, NOT-OD-09-016).
  • Renewals. Applicants may submit a renewal application.
  • Special Date(s). This FOA uses non-standard due dates. See Receipt, Review and Anticipated Start Dates
  • Application Materials. See Section IV.1 for application materials.
  • General Information. For general information on SF424 (R&R) Application and Electronic Submission, see these Web sites:
  • Hearing Impaired. Telecommunications for the hearing impaired are available at: TTY:  (301) 451-5936

For Further Information:

Sunbelt social networks conference June 29 – July 4, Italy

January 12, 2010

The annual Sunbelt social networks conference will be in northern Italy this year on Lake Garda. June 29 to July 4, 2010.

Abstracts are due Friday, Jan 15 2010. You don’t need to submit a whole paper, just the abstract.

For more information:

DIME conference – Organizing for Networked Innovation

November 9, 2009

Here’s the call for papers for an upcoming network conference.


Call for paper

DIME conference – Organizing for Networked Innovation

Politecnico di Milano

Department of Management, Economics, and Industrial Engineering

April 15-16, 2010

The notion that companies can improve their innovative performance by utilizing the knowledge residing in networks has become prominent in innovation studies. In particular, the trend towards open innovation has resulted in firms experimenting with new ways of interacting and networking with external organizations and individuals. However, there is still limited knowledge concerning how firms can fruitfully exploit the potential inherent in their networks. Two main gaps emerge in the literature on boundary-spanning relationships, dealing with how companies should: (i) manage external interactions in order to access relevant knowledge; (ii) design their internal structures and managerial practices to properly absorb and leverage this knowledge. Moreover, there is a need to attend to how our increased knowledge about how innovation networks work can be used by firms to benefit from informal, intra-organizational networks and communities.

Innovation networks pose considerable challenges to scholars in economics, management and organisation science as in such a framework, organizing innovation initiatives through traditional hierarchical structure and mechanisms have limited, and probably, even detrimental effects.

The conference intends to be an opportunity for collecting and discussing theoretical and empirical contributions on organizing for networked innovation.

We welcome theoretical and empirical contributions related to the following themes of the conference.

THEME A. Theoretical and empirical foundations of networked innovation

–          How can different levels of analysis be addressed and integrated, namely individuals, teams, companies, and whole networks?

–          How can different theoretical lenses (e.g. those provided by agency theory, transaction cost economics, the information processing stream, social network theory, competence- and resource-based perspectives) be combined and integrated so as to provide fresh insights into the organization of networked innovation?

–          Which are the challenges posed by the interaction with peculiar agents such as communities of users and developers, university star scientists, new technology-based firms, other companies in international alliances and acquisitions?

–          Are there peculiar structural characteristics that shape the way firms organize for network innovation?


THEME B. Designing firm organization for networked innovation

–          Which organizational structures are most suitable for managing boundary spanning relationships? How do they relate and interact with characteristics of the external partner?

–          Which managerial practices should companies adopt in order to design their internal organisation so as to properly acquire, assimilate and take advantage of knowledge generated by external sources? Which are the roles of intensive vertical and lateral communication, compensation schemes rewarding employees for knowledge sharing, and increasing delegation of decision rights to selected employees?

–          Is there any incompatibility between the organizational structure and mechanisms of different actors in innovation networks? Conversely, are there any synergistic effects?

–          How can MNCs organize their internal network so as to benefit from their external network? Are there any specific organizational challenges involved in the interaction of cross-border intra- and inter-firm networks?

–          How can innovation activities in informal, intra-organizational networks be facilitated and supported by management when the use of formal hierarchical power is not applicable? How can management simultaneously attend to both formal organizational structures and informal networks, and what types of incentives and control mechanisms can be applied in these dual settings?

–          What organizational architectures and practices are best suited to allow firms to benefit from the increasing development of “markets for ideas”? What role does the licensor play in organizing the licensee’s innovation activities?


THEME C. Networked innovation and performance

–          Which is the impact of networking on firms’ economic and innovation performances? How does recourse to different organisational structures and managerial practices moderate the link between use of external knowledge sources and firm performance?

–          What networks structures are most conducive to innovation? Do networks of different types or with various structural characteristics further different types of innovation behaviour?

–          Are there peculiar institutional aspects (e.g. relating to IPR protection) that shape the way firms benefit from networked innovation? Are there any industry-specific effects?


THEME D. Small firms and networked innovations

–          How can small firms, both in traditional and high tech sectors, profit from networked innovation? What are their strengths and weakness along this path?

–          Which are the challenges faced by small companies and start-ups in organizing for networked innovation? Are their most suitable internal organizational arrangements different from those of large firms?

–          Do small firms experience difficulties in accessing national and international knowledge and innovation networks? Do these difficulties depend on structural and sectoral specificities?

–          How can small firms manage the dichotomy between openness and protection of proprietary knowledge? How they can copy with appropriability hazards?


Confirmed key note speakers for the conference are Georg von Krogh (ETH, Zurich and Pillar) and Phanish Puranam (London Business School).

Paper submission

Participants who wish to present their research at the conference are invited to submit full paper (in PDF) not exceeding 10.000 words (all included) to Cristina Rossi Lamastra (, no later than January 8th 2010. All submissions will be peer reviewed and the conference organizing committee will select the papers considering their novelty, academic quality and relation to the theme of the conference. The decision of paper acceptance will be given by January 24th 2010. Revised versions of accepted papers should be submitted no later than March 15th 2010.

A special issue of Industry & Innovation will follow the conference, hosting a selection of the presented papers.

Moreover, we are investigating the possibility of other special issues devoted to issues related to firm organization in a networked innovation environment (Theme B) and to open innovation & small business (Theme D) to be hosted in well known journals.



There is no conference fee, but registration is necessary. Participants will be asked to pay for their own travel and accommodation. Please, register by sending an email to Elena Belotti ( and in copy to Daniela Cojocaru ( and Ognjenka Zrilic ( before February 15th 2010. Elena Belotti ( can assist you in arranging your accommodation. For other organizational aspects you can contact Daniela Cojocaru ( and Ognjenka Zrilic ( PhD students’ accommodation and travel expenses will be founded by the DIME network (up to a maximum of 15 PhD students). PhD students who are interested in attending the conference without presenting a paper are invited to send their CV, including a description of their research interests, to Cristina Rossi Lamastra (


Important dates

Paper submission: January 8th 2010

Notice for paper acceptance: January 24th 2010

Conference registration: February 15th 2010

Final paper submission: March 15th 2010


For further information at

The organizing committee

Massimo G. Colombo, Politecnico di Milano

Keld Laursen, Copenhagen Business School

Mats Magnusson, Chalmers University of Technology / IMIT

Lucia Piscitello, Politecnico di Milano

Toke Reichstein, Copenhagen Business School

Cristina Rossi Lamastra, Politecnico di Milano


Keynote address for 2-mode conference

October 8, 2009

Filip Agneessens (together with Peter Groenewegen and Gerhard van de Bunt) organized a terrific conference on 2-mode network analysis. The conference featured a lot of very fresh ideas.

Below is a link to the slides for the keynote address, which does not have so many fresh ideas but gives a decent overview of what is conventional in the 2-mode field.


September 20, 2009

Recently, Nancy Roberts posted a job opening notice on SOCNET. The job is at the Naval Postgraduate School for a social network analyst, who would be working on counter-terrorism projects.  Sam Friedman took exception to this, arguing essentially that in even posting the message the SOCNET list is complicit in murder and other illegal activity. The full text of his message is here:

It has now been more than 24 hours since this appeared.

This is a clear solicitation for people to abet in the murder of innocent civilians and also of “terrorists” and “counterinsurgents”–some of whom might in some circumstances be called “freedom fighters” by some of us.)

This is done, furthermore, in a context in which the USA is engaged in the illegal invasion and/or occupation of other countries.

Thus, I am somewhat surprised that no one else has remarked upon why this list serve is making itself available to the solicitation of illegal acts.

One hypothesis, based on my own trepidation to respond to this in any form, is that people fear retaliation by the US military or its allied agencies if they say anything on this issue.

If so, this is itself a testament to our times.

What do you think?


What a bind these conversations are. Personally, I don’t want Socnet to be a current affairs forum, especially a shrill and partisan one. But then, I really could just skip the stuff that I’m not interested in. And I recognize that my concerns are pretty shallow: while people like Sam are trying to stop murder, I’m fretting over my cluttered inbox.

Still, the moral frame makes it very difficult to discuss anything because at some level every dissenting opinion is an immoral act. If Sam is right about the US, then Ezra’s support for Nancy’s post weakens Sam’s call and makes a very tiny yet positive contribution to American atrocities. Furthermore, the listserv itself is in moral error for allowing the airing of an implicit point of view that ultimately supports murder, as Sam quite logically points out. Of course, non-moralists are quick to spot the problem with this sort of censorship. Whose views get to air? But from the moralist point of view, this is moral relativism which is a contradiction in terms; after all, we don’t give equal time to pederasts.

Am I advocating that moralist posts like Sam’s be stricken from Socnet? I’d sure like that, but as something of a moral relativist, I haven’t got a leg to stand on. What a bind. Good thing I’m not the SOCNET listmaster anymore.

Related posts: