Randomness and clustering of responses in online learning networks

The goal of this research is to explore the nature of the response relation in online learning networks. We ask whether actors choose their response partners at random or whether certain special mechanisms are at work. We compare the observed values of clustering of responses in 95 online learning networks with the predictions of two suitable Random Graph models. All the online distance learning networks exhibit clustering that is incompatible with the random choices of response partners, with no constraints on the response capacities of actors. But the observed clustering in all networks is compatible with the random choices of response partners subject to constraints on their total response capacities. We provide a possible explanation for this behavior, based on the nature and goal of the online learning networks, and discuss the practical implications for online distance education.

[1]  Gilad Ravid,et al.  Mechanisms and architectures of online learning communities , 2004, IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004. Proceedings..

[2]  T. Snijders.  Enumeration and simulation methods for 0–1 matrices with given marginals , 1991 .

[3]  L. Festinger,et al.  A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance , 2017 .

[4]  Chris Wiggins,et al.  Discriminative topological features reveal biological network mechanisms , 2004, BMC Bioinformatics.

[5]  Mauricio Barahona,et al.  Synchronization in small-world systems. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[6]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning. Fourth Edition. , 1991 .

[7]  P. Holland,et al.  Local Structure in Social Networks , 1976 .

[8]  Sergey N. Dorogovtsev,et al.  Evolution of Networks: From Biological Nets to the Internet and WWW (Physics) , 2003 .

[9]  M. Newman,et al.  Random graphs with arbitrary degree distributions and their applications. , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[10]  Carolyn J. Anderson,et al.  A p* primer: logit models for social networks , 1999, Soc. Networks.

[11]  R. LaRose,et al.  Electronic Bulletin Boards and “Public Goods” Explanations of Collaborative Mass Media , 1993 .

[12]  S. Shen-Orr,et al.  Network motifs: simple building blocks of complex networks. , 2002, Science.

[13]  Fay Sudweeks,et al.  ProjectH: a collaborative quantitative study of computer-mediated communication , 1998 .

[14]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[15]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Structure and Dynamics of Networks , 2009 .

[16]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Community Development Among Distance Learners: Temporal and Technological Dimensions , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[17]  F. Harary,et al.  STRUCTURAL BALANCE: A GENERALIZATION OF HEIDER'S THEORY1 , 1977 .

[18]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[19]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[20]  Michael Stefanone,et al.  Social information sharing in a CSCL community , 2002, CSCL.

[21]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Logit models and logistic regressions for social networks: I. An introduction to Markov graphs andp , 1996 .

[22]  Yannis A. Dimitriadis,et al.  Studying social aspects of computer-supported collaboration with a mixed evaluation approach , 2002, CSCL.

[23]  Thierry Chanier,et al.  Social Network Analysis Used for Modelling Collaboration in Distance Learning Groups , 2002, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[24]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  The Structure and Dynamics of Networks: (Princeton Studies in Complexity) , 2006 .

[25]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Evolution of Networks: From Biological Nets to the Internet and WWW , 2004 .

[26]  Gilad Ravid,et al.  Response Neighborhoods in Online Learning Networks: A Quantitative Analysis , 2005, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..