Using sociometers to quantify social interaction patterns

Research on human social interactions has traditionally relied on self-reports. Despite their widespread use, self-reported accounts of behaviour are prone to biases and necessarily reduce the range of behaviours and the number of subjects, that may be studied simultaneously. The development of ever smaller sensors makes it possible to study group-level human behaviour in naturalistic settings outside research laboratories. We used such sensors, sociometers, to examine gender, talkativeness and interaction style in two different contexts. Here, we find that in the collaborative context, women were much more likely to be physically proximate to other women and were also significantly more talkative than men, especially in small groups. In contrast, there were no gender-based differences in the non-collaborative setting. Our results highlight the importance of objective measurement in the study of human behaviour, here enabling us to discern context specific, gender-based differences in interaction style.

[1]  J. Gillon,et al.  Group dynamics , 1996 .

[2]  T. Good,et al.  Effects of Teacher Sex and Student Sex on Classroom Interaction. , 1973 .

[3]  H. Cooper,et al.  Classroom Interaction as a Function of Teacher Expectations, Student Sex, and Time of Year. , 1980 .

[4]  K. Deaux,et al.  Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. , 1987 .

[5]  M. Linn,et al.  Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. , 1988 .

[6]  H. Ibarra Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. , 1992 .

[7]  L. R. Shade,et al.  Gendered Lives: Communication, Gender and Culture , 1995 .

[8]  Kimberly D. Blum Asynchronous, computer-mediated communication (CMC)-based higher education at a distance: Gender differences in preferred learning styles, participation barriers, and communication patterns , 1999 .

[9]  C. Leaper Gender, affiliation, assertion, and the interactive context of parent-child play. , 2000, Developmental psychology.

[10]  C. Leaper,et al.  A meta-analytic review of gender variations in children's language use: talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. , 2004, Developmental psychology.

[11]  Lu Hong,et al.  Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  Merryn J Mathie,et al.  Accelerometry: providing an integrated, practical method for long-term, ambulatory monitoring of human movement , 2004, Physiological measurement.

[13]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Reality mining: sensing complex social systems , 2006, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[14]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Socially aware, computation and communication , 2005, Computer.

[15]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Mapping human networks , 2006, Fourth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PERCOM'06).

[16]  Masayuki Murata,et al.  Indoor Localization System using RSSI Measurement of Wireless Sensor Network based on ZigBee Standard , 2006, Wireless and Optical Communications.

[17]  Daniel Olgu ´ õn,et al.  Human Activity Recognition: Accuracy across Common Locations for Wearable Sensors , 2006 .

[18]  S. Page Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2007 .

[19]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S3 References the Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge , 2022 .

[20]  A-L Barabási,et al.  Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  A. Pentland,et al.  Thin slices of negotiation: predicting outcomes from conversational dynamics within the first 5 minutes. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[22]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Emergence of communities in weighted networks. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[23]  C. Leaper,et al.  A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Variations in Adults' Language Use: Talkativeness, Affiliative Speech, and Assertive Speech , 2007, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[24]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Are Women Really More Talkative Than Men? , 2007, Science.

[25]  F. Schmidt Meta-Analysis , 2008 .

[26]  K. Krippendorff,et al.  The Content Analysis Reader , 2008 .

[27]  W. Heath The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2008 .

[28]  David Lazer,et al.  Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Sensible Organizations: Technology and Methodology for Automatically Measuring Organizational Behavior , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[30]  D. Meyer,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Som Text Figs. S1 to S6 References Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups , 2022 .

[31]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Productivity Through Coffee Breaks: Changing Social Networks by Changing Break Structure , 2010 .

[32]  Ciro Cattuto,et al.  Dynamics of Person-to-Person Interactions from Distributed RFID Sensor Networks , 2010, PloS one.

[33]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Sex differences in intimate relationships , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[34]  R. Bales Interaction process analysis; a method for the study of small groups. , 2013 .