Accuracy and reliability of self-reported data in interorganizational networks

Abstract Although network analysis is becoming a more viable and informative methodology for the study of interorganizational behavior, issues involving the accuracy and reliability of self-reported or ‘cognitive’ network data are still unresolved. Two networks based on information and coordination relationships in each of four major cities are examined. Reliability of responses is assessed as the percent of confirmed relationships between agency respondents and by correlating the extent of agreement in each network. In addition, two possible measurement errors are examined: systematic errors which are network-independent and idiosyncratic errors which are network-dependent. These errors are assessed through correlational analyses of the intensity of an organization's relationships with the number of its relationships that are confirmed in each network. Also systematic errors are accounted for by calculating the proportion of confirmed relationships within the different response categories used to judge the strength of relationship between ego organizations in the network. It is concluded that boundary spanning personnel of organizations can provide fairly reliable responses to network generated questions, but that errors in the data tend to be systematic in the way that prior studies of interpersonal cognitive networks report.

[1]  Michael Patrick Allen,et al.  The identification of interlock groups in large corporate networks: convergent validation using divergent techniques , 1982 .

[2]  Leah A. Lievrouw,et al.  Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists , 1987 .

[3]  M. Hammer.  Implications of behavioral and cognitive reciprocity in social network data , 1985 .

[4]  Linton C. Freeman,et al.  Words, Deeds and Social Structure: A Preliminary Study of the Reliability of Informants , 1987 .

[5]  John A. Sonquist,et al.  Interlocking Directorates in the Top U.S. Corporations , 1975 .

[6]  H H Goldman,et al.  Evaluating the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation program on chronic mental illness. , 1994, The Milbank quarterly.

[7]  Katherine Faust.  Comparison of methods for positional analysis: Structural and general equivalences☆ , 1988 .

[8]  Michael Schwartz,et al.  The Power Structure of American Business. , 1986 .

[9]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Measuring And Assessing Organizations , 1980 .

[10]  J. M. McPherson,et al.  Hypernetwork sampling: Duality and differentiation among voluntary organizations , 1982 .

[11]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Boundary Spanning Roles and Organization Structure , 1977 .

[12]  P. Doreian,et al.  Fixed list versus snowball selection of social networks , 1992 .

[13]  D M Steinwachs,et al.  Design for the national evaluation of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Program on Chronic Mental Illness. , 1990, Hospital & community psychiatry.

[14]  Ronald S. Burt,et al.  Positions in Networks , 1976 .

[15]  P. Arabie,et al.  An algorithm for clustering relational data with applications to social network analysis and comparison with multidimensional scaling , 1975 .

[16]  L. Sailer.  Structural equivalence: Meaning and definition, computation and application , 1978 .

[17]  R. Burt,et al.  Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction , 1983 .

[18]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant accuracy in social network data IV: a comparison of clique-level structure in behavioral and cognitive network data , 1979 .

[19]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant accuracy in social-network data V. An experimental attempt to predict actual communication from recall data☆ , 1982 .

[20]  Patrick Doreian,et al.  Using multiple network analytic tools for a single social network , 1988 .

[21]  Mark S. Mizruchi,et al.  Intercorporate Relations: The Structural Analysis of Business , 1992 .

[22]  C. Oliver.  Determinants of Interorganizational Relationships: Integration and Future Directions , 1990 .

[23]  Thomas H. Koenig,et al.  Models of the Significance of Interlocking Corporate Directorates , 1979 .

[24]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  NETWORK DATA AND MEASUREMENT , 1990 .

[25]  A. Kimball Romney,et al.  Predicting informant accuracy from patterns of recall among individuals , 1984 .

[26]  P. Killworth,et al.  INFORMANT ACCURACY IN SOCIAL NETWORK DATA II , 1977 .

[27]  White,et al.  Cites and Fights: Material Entailment Analysis of the Eighteenth-century Chemical Revolution , 1988 .

[28]  Mark Granovetter,et al.  CHAPTER 24 – THE THEORY-GAP IN SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS1 , 1979 .

[29]  S. Boorman,et al.  Social Structure from Multiple Networks. I. Blockmodels of Roles and Positions , 1976, American Journal of Sociology.

[30]  John M. Bolland.  Perceived leadership stability and the structure of urban agenda-setting networks , 1985 .

[31]  B. Wellman.  Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. , 1988 .

[32]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant accuracy in social network data III: A comparison of triadic structure in behavioral and cognitive data , 1979 .

[33]  Joseph P. Morrissey,et al.  Network analysis methods for mental health service system research : a comparison of two community support systems , 1985 .

[34]  M. Tushman,et al.  Boundary Spanning Individuals: Their Role in Information Transfer and Their Antecedents , 1981 .

[35]  R. Burt,et al.  Corporate Profits And Cooptation , 1983 .

[36]  L. Freeman,et al.  Cognitive Structure and Informant Accuracy , 1987 .

[37]  R. Burt.  Toward a structural theory of action , 1982 .

[38]  Nan Lin,et al.  Access to occupations through social ties , 1986 .

[39]  Patrick Doreian.  Borgatti toppings on Doreian splits: Reflections on regular equivalence , 1988 .