Smoking Behavior and Friendship Formation: The Importance of Time Heterogeneity in Studying Social Network Dynamics

This study illustrates the importance of assessing and accounting for time heterogeneity in longitudinal social network analysis. We apply the time heterogeneity model selection procedure of [1] to a dataset collected on social tie formation for university freshman in the Netherlands by [2]. Within the context of analyzing selection effects for smoking homophily to understand the implications of tobacco policy at a university, we show that failing to account for time heterogeneity yields quite different results substantively from the model arrived at using [1]. While the results are limited by the small scope of the dataset, the paper motivates the testing of time heterogeneity within longitudinal studies of social network behavior and further study of tobacco policy within university settings.

[1]  E. Vartiainen,et al.  Dynamics of adolescent friendship networks and smoking behavior , 2010, Soc. Networks.

[2]  Sheldon Cohen.  Social relationships and health. , 2004, The American psychologist.

[3]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics , 2010, Soc. Networks.

[4]  B. Houle,et al.  Smoker-free workplace policies: developing a model of public health consequences of workplace policies barring employment to smokers , 2009, Tobacco Control.

[5]  W. Greene,et al.  计量经济分析 = Econometric analysis , 2009 .

[6]  Michael Schweinberger,et al.  Statistical methods for studying the evolution of networks and behavior , 2007 .

[7]  Longitudinal Methods of Network Analysis ∗ , .

[8]  N. Christakis,et al.  SUPPLEMENTARY ONLINE MATERIAL FOR: The Collective Dynamics of Smoking in a Large Social Network , 2022 .

[9]  G. Maddala.  Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics: Introduction , 1983 .

[10]  C. Steglich,et al.  Applying SIENA: An illustrative analysis of the co-evolution of adolescents’ friendship networks, taste in music, and alcohol consumption , 2006 .

[11]  Christian Steglich,et al.  Beyond dyadic interdependence: Actor-oriented models for co-evolving social networks and individual behaviors , 2007 .

[12]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[13]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  Social Networks , 2013, Handbook of Graph Drawing and Visualization.

[14]  L. Berkman.  Assessing the physical health effects of social networks and social support. , 1984, Annual review of public health.

[15]  Samuel Leinhardt,et al.  A dynamic model for social networks , 1977 .

[16]  D. Vere-Jones.  Markov Chains , 1972, Nature.

[17]  W. Marsden.  I and J , 2012 .

[18]  P. Schmidt,et al.  Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. , 1984 .

[19]  K. Bauman,et al.  Peer group structure and adolescent cigarette smoking: a social network analysis. , 1993, Journal of health and social behavior.

[20]  Gerrit G. van de Bunt,et al.  Friends by choice. An actor-oriented statistical network model for friendship networks through time , 1999 .

[21]  T. Snijders.  The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics , 2001 .

[22]  T. Snijders,et al.  Modeling the Coevolution of Networks and Behavior , 2007 .

[23]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Markov models for digraph panel data: Monte Carlo-based derivative estimation , 2007, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[24]  C. Steglich,et al.  DYNAMIC NETWORKS AND BEHAVIOR: SEPARATING SELECTION FROM INFLUENCE: separating selection from influence , 2010 .

[25]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Friendship Networks Through Time: An Actor-Oriented Dynamic Statistical Network Model , 1999, Comput. Math. Organ. Theory.

[26]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Assessing and accounting for time heterogeneity in stochastic actor oriented models , 2011, Adv. Data Anal. Classif..

[27]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .