Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Object oriented modeling of social networks

  • Published:
Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explain principles of object oriented modeling in the scope of modeling dynamic social networks. As such, the approach of object oriented modeling is advocated within the field of organizational research that focuses on networks.

We provide a brief introduction into the field of social networks and present an overview of existing network models and methods. Subsequently we introduce an elementary problem field in the social sciences in general, and in studies of organizational change and design in particular: the micro-macro link. We argue that the most appropriate way to hadle this problem is the principle of methodological individualism. For social network analysis, to contribute to this theoretical perspective, it should include an individual choice mechanism and become more dynamically oriented. Subsequently, object oriented modeling is advocated as a tool to meet these requirements for social network analysis. We show that characteristics of social systems that are emphasized in the methodological individualistic approach have their direct equivalences in object oriented models. The link between the micro level where actors act, and the macro level where phenomena occur as a consequence and cause of these actions, can be modelled in a straightforward way.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AbelsonR. P. and A.Bernstein (1963), “A Computer Model of Community Referendum Controversies,” Public Opinion Quarterly 27, 93–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • AlbaR.D. (1973), “A Graph Theoretic Definition of a Sociometric Clique,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 3, 113–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • AllanG. (1990), Friendship: Developing a Sociological Perspective. New York: Harvester.

    Google Scholar 

  • AndersonC.J., S.S.Wasserman and K.Faust (1992), “Building Stochastic Blockmodels,” Social Networks 14, 137–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • AnthonisseJ.M. (1971), The Rush in a Directed Graph. Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • BaerveldtC. and T.A.B.Snijders (1994), “Influences on and from the Segmentation of Networks: Hypotheses and Tests,” Social Networks 16, 213–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • BanksD.L. and K.M.Carley (1996), “Models for Network Evolution,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 173–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes J.A. (1979), “Network Analysis: Orienting Notion, Rigorous Technique or Substantive Field of Study,” in P.W.Holland and S.Leinhardt (Eds.) Perspectives on Social Network Research, New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BartholomewD.J. (1967), Stochastic Models for Social Processes. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • BavelasA. (1950), “Communication Patterns in Task Oriented Groups,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 22, 271–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • BeauchampM.A. (1965), “An Improved Index of Centrality,” Behavioral Science 10, 161–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • BerkowitzS.D. (1982), An Introduction to Structural Analysis: the Network Approach to Social Research. Toronto: Butterworths.

    Google Scholar 

  • BlumT.C. (1985), “Structural Constraints on Interpersonal Relationships: A Test of Blau's Macrosociological Theory,” American Journal of Sociology 91, 511–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • BonacichP. (1987), “Power and Centrality; A Family of Measures,” American Journal of Sociology 92, 1170–1182.

    Google Scholar 

  • BorgattiS.P., M.G.Everett and P.R.Shirey (1990), “LS Sets, Lambda Sets and Other Cohesive Subsets,” Social Networks 12, 337–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • BoudonR. and F.Bourricaud (1982), Dictionnaire Critique de la Sociologie, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • BoydJ.P. (1991), Social Semigroups: A Unified Theory of Scaling and Blockmodeling as Applied to Social Networks, Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BurtR. (1982), Toward a Structural Theory of action: Network Models of Social Strucgure, Perception, and Action. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BurtR. (1992), Structural Holes. The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley K. (1989), “The Value of Cognitive Foundations for Dynamic Social Theory,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 14, 171–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • CarleyK. (1990), “Group Stability: A Socio-Cognitive Approach,” Advances in Group Processes 7, 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • CarleyK. (1991a), “A Theory of Group Stability,” American Sociological Review 56, 331–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • CarleyK. (1991b), “Growing Up: The Development and Acquisition of Social Knowledge,” in J.A.Howard and P.L.Callero (Eds.) The Self-Society Dynamic: Cognition, Emotion, and Action, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley K.M. and M.J. Prietula (1994), “ACTS Theory: Extending the Model of Bounded Rationality,” in K.M.Carley and M.J.Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • CartwrightD. and F.Harary (1956), “Structural Balance: A Generalization of Heider's Theory,” Psychological Review 63, 277–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman J.S. (1964), Introduction to Mathematical Sociology. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman J.S. (1986), “Micro Foundations and Macrosocial Theory,” in S.Lindenberg, J.S.Coleman and S.Nowak (Eds.), Approaches to Social Theory, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman J.S. (1990), Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DavisJ.A. (1963), “Structural Balance, Mechanical Solidarity, and Interpersonal Relations,” American Journal of Sociology 68, 444–463.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DavisJ.A. (1967), “Clustering and Structural Balance in Graphs,” Human relations 20, 181–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • DavisJ.A. and S.Leinhardt (1972), “The Structure of Positive Interpersonal Relations in Small Groups,” in J.Berger (Ed.) Sociological Theories in Progress, vol. 2, Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • DawkinsR. (1987), The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVosH. and E.P.H.Zeggelink (1994), “The Emergence of Reciprocal Altruism and Group Living: An Object Oriented Simulation Model of Human Social Evolution,” Social Science Information 33, 493–517.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Doreian P.D. (1979), “Structural Control Models of Group Processes,” in P.W.Holland and S.Leinhardt (Eds.) Perspectives on Social Network Research, New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DoreianP., R.Kapuscincki, D.Krackhardt and J.Szcypula (1996), “A Brief History of Balance Through Time,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 113–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • FararoT.J. and J.Skvoretz (1984), “Biased Networks and Social Structure Theorems, Part II.” Social Networks 6, 223–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • FaustK. (1988), “Comparison of Methods for Positional Analysis: Structural and General Equivalence,” Social Networks 10, 313–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • FaustK. and S.S.Wasserman (1992), “Blockmodels: Interpretation and Evaluation,” Social Networks 14 5–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • FestingerL. (1950), “Informal Social Communication,” Psychological Review 57, 271–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiksel J. (1980), “Dynamic Evolution in Societal Networks,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 7, 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • FischerC.S. (1982), To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FienbergS.E. and S.S.Wasserman (1981), “Categorical Data Analysis of Simple Sociometric Relations” in S.Leinhardt (Ed.) Sociological Methodology, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • FrankK.A. (1995), “Identifying Cohesive Subgroups,” Social Networks 17, 27–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • FrankO. (1991), “Statistical Analysis of Change in Networks,” Statistica Neerlandica 45, 283–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman L.C. (1979), “Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarification,” Social Networks 1, 215–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • FreemanL.C. (1992), “The Sociological Concept of ‘Group”: An Empirical Test of Two Models,” American Journal of Sociology 98, 152–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • FreemanL.C., S.P.Borgatti, and D.White (1991), “Centrality in Valued Graphs: A Measure of betweenness based on Network Flow,” Social Networks 13, 141–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • FreemanL.C., D.R.White and A.K.Romney (Eds.) (1989), Research Methods in Social Network Analysis, Fair-fax, VA: George Mason University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FrenchJ.R. (1956), “A Formal Theory of Social Power,” Psychological review 63, 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • GoldbergA. and D.Robson (1983), Smaltalk-80. The Language and its Implementation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • HageP. and F.Harary (1995), “Eccentricity and Centrality in Networks,” Social Networks 17, 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • HallinanM.T. (1974), The Structure of Positive Sentiment. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • HallinanM.T. (1979), “The Process of Friendship Formation,” Social Networks 1, 93–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • HararyF. (1969), Graph Theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • HararyF., R.Z.Norman and M.Cartwright (1965), Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • HeiderF. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoede, C. (1978), “A New Status Score for Actors in a Social Network,” Twente University, Department of Applied Mathematics.

  • HoivikT. and N.P.Gleditsch (1970), “Structural Parameters of Graphs; A Theoretical Investigation,” Quality and Quantity 4, 193–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1970), “A Method for Detecting Structure in Sociometric Data,” American Journal of Sociology 70, 492–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1971), “Transitivity in Structural Models of Small Groups,” Comparative group studies 2, 107–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1972), “Some Evidence on the Transitivity of Positive Interpersonal Sentiment,” American Journal of Sociology 72, 1205–1209.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1976), “Local Structure in Social Networks,” in D.Heise (Ed.), Sociological Methodology, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1977a), “A Dynamic Model for Social Networks,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 5, 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1977b), “Social Structure as a Network Process,” Zeitschrift für Soziologie 6, 386–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1979), Perspectives on Social Network Research. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HollandP.W. and S.Leinhardt (1981), “An Exponential Family of Probability Distributions for Directed Graphs,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 76, 33–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • HubbellC.H. (1965), “An Input-Output Approach to Clique Identification,” Sociometry 28, 377–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hummel, H.J. and W. Sodeur (1984), Strukturentwicklung unter Studienanfangern. Ein Werkstattbericht, Universitat Duisburg.

  • Hummel H.J. and W. Sodeur (1990), “Evaluating Models of Change in Triadic Sociometric Structures,” in J.Weesie and H.Flap (Eds.) Social networks through time, Utrecht: ISOR.

    Google Scholar 

  • HummonN.P. and T.J.Fararo (1995), “Actors and Networks as Object,” Social Networks 17, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter J.E. (1978), “Dynamic Sociometry,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 6, 87–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter J.E. (1979), “Toward a General Framework for Dynamic Theories of Sentiment in Small Groups Derived from Theories of Attitude Change,” in P.W.Holland and S.Leinhardt (Eds.) Perspectives on Social Network Research, New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • JohnsenE.C. (1986), “Structure and Process: Sgreement Models for Friendship Formation,” Social Networks 8, 257–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • JohnsenE.C. (1989), “The Micro-Macro Connection: Exact Structure and Process,” in F.Roberts (Ed.) Applications of Combinatorics and Graph Theory to the Biological and Social Sciences. New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • KatzL. (1953), “A New Status Index Derived from Sociometric Data Analysis,” Psychometrika 18, 39–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • KatzL. and C.H.Proctor (1959), “The Concept of Configuration of Interpersonal Relations in a Group as a Time Dependent Stochastic Process,” Psychometrika 24, 317–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • KemenyJ.G., and J.L.Snell (1962), Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences, Waltham, MA: Blaisdell.

    Google Scholar 

  • KillworthP.D. and H.R.Bernard (1976), “A Model of Human Group Dynamics,” Social Science Research 5, 173–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • KnokeD. and J. H.Kuklinski (1982), Network Analysis: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences No. 28, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • KrempelL. (1987), Soziale Interaktionen: Einstellungen, Biographien, Situationen und Beziehungsnetzwerke; Dynamische Ereignisanalysen. Bochum: Ulrich Schallwig Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krempel, L. (1988), “Interpersonal Structure and Contact: Empirical Evidence from the Analysis of a Series of Social Networks in Time and Contact as a Process. An Analysis with Tools of ‘Event History’ Analysis,” Unpublished manuscript.

  • Lazega, E. and M. van Duijn (1996), “Formal Structure and Exchanges of Advice in a Law Firm: A Random Effects Model,” forthcoming.

  • LeavittH.J. (1951), “Some Effects on Communication Patterns on Group Performance,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46, 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeendersR.T.A.J. (1995), Structure and Influence: Statistical Models for the Dynamics of Actor Attributes, Network Structure and Their Interdepenence. Amsterdam: Thesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeendersR.T.A.J. (1996), “Dynamics of Friendship and Best Friendship Choices,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehermann Madsen O. and B. Moller-Pedersen (1988), “What Object-Oriented Programming May Be—and What It Does Not Have To Be,” in S.Giessing and K.Nygaard (Eds.) ECOOP 88. European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt R.E., G.P. Cohen, J.C. Kunz, C.I. Nass, T. Christianse, and Y. Jin (1994), “The ‘Virtual Design Team’: Simulating How Organization Structure and Information Processing Tools Affect Team Performance,” in K.M.Carley and M.J.Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • LindenbergS. (1985), “An Assessment of the New Political Economy: Its Potential for the Social Sciences and for Sociology in Particular,” Sociological Theory 3, 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • LindenbergS. (1990), “Homo Socio-Economicus: The Emergence of a General Model of Man in the Social Sciences,” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) 146, 727–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • LorrainF., and H.C.White (1971), “Structural Equivalence of Individuals in Social Networks,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1, 49–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • LuceR.D. and A.Perry (1949), “A Method of Matrix Analysis of Group Structure,” Psychometrika 14, 94–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • MasuchM. and P.LaPotin (1989), “Beyond Garbage Cans: An AI Model of Organizational Choice,” Administrative Science Quarterly 34, 38–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • MayerT.F. (1984), “Parties and Networks: Stochastic Models for Relationship Networks,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 10, 51–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • MitchellJ.C. (1969), Social Network in Urban Situations. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MokkenR.J. (1979), “Cliques, Clubs and Clans,” Quality and Quantity 13, 161–173.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MullinM. (1989), Object Oriented Program Design with Examples in C ++. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nohria N. and R.G. Eccles (1992), (Eds.) Networks and Organizations. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Objectworks (1989), Smalltalk-80 User's Guide, Parc Place Systems.

  • Objectworks (1990), Smalltalk Release 4, User's Guide, Parc Place Systems.

  • PattisonP.E. (1988), “Network Models: Some Comments on Papers in This Special Issue,” Social Networks 10, 383–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • PattisonP.E. (1993), Algebraic Models for Social Networks. England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • PattisonP.E. and S.S.Wasserman (1995), “Constructing Algebraic Models for Local Social Networks Using Statistical Methods,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 39: 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • PinsonL.J. and R.S.Wiener (1988), An Introduction to Object-Oriented Programming and Smalltalk, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popping R. (1989), “The Distance Matrix and Distance-Based Measures,” in C.J.A.Sprenger and F.N.Stokman (Eds.) GRADAP; Graph Definition and Analysis Package, Groningen, the Netherlands: ProGAMMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainio K. (1966), “A Study on Sociometric Group Structure: An Application of a Stochastic Theory of Social Interaction,” in J.Berger, M.Zelditch and B.Anderson (Eds.) Sociological theories in progress, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart D. E. and J. L. McClelland (Eds.) (1988), Explorations in Parallel Distributed Processing: A Handbook of Models, Programs, and Exercises. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • RungerG. and S. S.Wasserman (1979), “Longitudinal Analysis of Friendship Networks,” Social Networks 2, 143–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • ScottJ. (1991), Social Network Analysis; A Handbook. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • SeidmanS.B. (1983), “LS Sets and Cohesive Subsets of Graphs and Hypergraphs,” Social Networks 5, 92–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • SeidmanS.B. and B.L.Foster (1978), “A Graph Theoretic Generalization of the Clique Concept,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 6, 139–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • SimonH.A. (1957), Models of Man. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • SkvoretzJ. (1991), “Theoretical and Methodological Models of Networks and Relations,” Social Networks 13, 275–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • SkvoretzJ., K.Faust, and T.J.Fararo (1996), “Social Structure, Networks, and E-State Structuralism Models,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. (1981), “The Degree Variance: An Index of Graph Heterogeneity,” Social Networks 3, 163–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. (1990), “Testing for Change in a Digraph at Two Time Ooints,” Social Networks 12, 359–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. (1991), “Enumeration and Simulation Methods For 0–1 Matrices with Given Marginals,” Psychometrika 56, 397–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. (1996), “Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models for Network Change,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. and K.Nowicki (1994), “Estimation and Prediction for Stochastic Block Models for Graphs with Latent Block Structure,” internal publication, Heymans Bulletins 93: 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • SnijdersT.A.B. and F.N.Stokman (1987), “Extensions of Triad Counts to Networks with Different Subsets of Points and Testing Underlying Random Graph Distributions,” Social Networks 9, 249–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • SörensenA.B. and M.T.Hallinan (1976), “A Stochastic Model for Change in Group Structure,” Social Science Research 5, 43–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • SprengerC.J.A. and F.N.Stokman (1989), GRADAP User's Manual, Groningen: ProGAMMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokman F.N. and P. Doreian (1996), “Evolution of Social Networks: Processes and Principles,” in P.Doreian and F.N.Stokman (Eds.) Evolution Of Social Networks, Langhorne, PA: Gordon and Breach, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokman F.N. and J.M.M. Van den Bos (1992), “A Two-Stage Model of Policy Making, With an Empirical Test in the US Energy Policy Domain,” in G.Moore and J.Allen Whitt (Eds.) The Political Consequences of Social Networks, Volume 4 of Research and Society, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokman, F.N. and R. Van Oosten (1994), “Generic Steps in Collective Decision Making,” Paper presented at the Sunbelt XIV International Social Network Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 17–20.

  • Stokman F.N. and E.P.H. Zeggelink (1996a), “Is Politics Power or Policy Oriented? A Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Access Models in Policy Networks,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 21, 77–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokman F.N. and E.P.H. Zeggelink (1996b), “‘Self-Organizing’ Friendship Networks,” in W.B.G.Liebrand and D.M.Messick (Eds.) Frontiers in Social Dilemmas Research. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • StraussD. and M.Ikeda (1990), “Pseudolikelihood Estimation for Social Networks,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 85, 204–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • TaylorM. (1969), “Influence Structures,” Sociometry 32, 490–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Duijn M.A.J. (1995), “Estimation of Random Effect Models for Directed Graphs,” in T.A.B.Snijders, B.Engel, J.C.vanHouwelingen, A.Keen, G.J.Stemerdink, and M.Verbeek (Eds.) Toeval zit overal; Symposium Statistische Software, nr 7, Groningen: ProGAMMA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Roozendaal, P. and E.P.H. Zeggelink (1996), “Coalition Formation in Political Networks: A Simulation Approach,” forthcoming.

  • Verkama M., R.P. Hämäläinen, and H. Ehtamo (1994), “Modeling and Computational Analysis of Reactive Behavior in Organizations,” in K.M.Carley and M.J.Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visual Works 2.5 (1995), Visual Works 2.5. User's Guide, Parc Place Systems.

  • WassermanS.S. (1978), “Models for Binary Directed Graphs and Their Applications,” Advances in Applied Probability 10, 803–818.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. (1980a), “Analyzing Social Networks as Stochastic Processes,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 75, 280–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. (1980b), “A Stochastic Model for Directed Graphs with Transition Rates Determined by Reciprocity,” in K.Schuessler (Ed.), Sociological Methodology, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. (1987), “Conformity of Two Sociometric Relations,” Psychometrika 52, 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. and K.Faust (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. and J.Galaskiewicz (1994), Advances in Social Network Analysis: Research From the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. and D.Iacobucci (1988), “Sequential Social Network Data,” Psychometrika 53, 261–282.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WassermanS.S. and S.O.Weaver (1985), “Statistical Analysis of Binary Relational Data: Parameter Estimation,” Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 29, 406–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weesie J. and H. Flap (Eds.) (1990), Social Networks Through Time. Utrecht, the Netherlands: ISOR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman B. and S.D. Berkowitz (Eds) (1988), Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WellmanB., O.Frank, V.Espinoza, S.Lundquist, and C.Wilson (1991), “Integrating Individual, Relational and Structural Analysis,” Social Networks 13, 223–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • WhiteD.R. and S.P.Borgatti (1994), “Betweenness Centrality Measures for Directed Graphs,” Social Networks 16, 335–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • WhiteH.C., S.A.Boorman and R.L.Breiger (1976), “Social Structure from Multiple Networks I: Blockmodels of Roles and Positions,” American Journal of Sociology 81, 730–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • WipplerR. (1978), “The Structural-Individualistic Approach in Dutch Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Social Science,” The Netherlands Journal of Sociology 14, 135–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • WongG.Y. (1987), “Bayesian Models for Directed Graphs,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 82, 140–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • WrightsmanL.S. and K.Deaux (1981), Social Psychology in the Eighties. 3rd. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZeggelinkE.P.H. (1993), Strangers Into Friends; The Evolution of Friendship Networks Using an Individual Oriented Modeling Approach. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZeggelinkE.P.H. (1994), “Dynamics of Structure: An Object-Oriented Approach,” Social Networks 16, 295–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZeggelinkE.P.H. (1995), “Evolving Friendship Networks: An Individual Oriented Approach Implementing Similarity,” Social Networks 17, 83–110.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology (ICS), University of Groningen, The Netherlands

    Evelien P. H. Zeggelink, Reinier Van Oosten & Frans N. Stokman

Authors
  1. Evelien P. H. Zeggelink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reinier Van Oosten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Frans N. Stokman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zeggelink, E.P.H., Van Oosten, R. & Stokman, F.N. Object oriented modeling of social networks. Comput Math Organiz Theor 2, 115–138 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00240423

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00240423

Keywords

Search

Navigation