Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Can longitudinal generalized estimating equation models distinguish network influence and homophily? An agent-based modeling approach to measurement characteristics

Authors: Kori Sauser Zachrison, Theodore J. Iwashyna, Achamyeleh Gebremariam, Meghan Hutchins, Joyce M Lee

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Connected individuals (or nodes) in a network are more likely to be similar than two randomly selected nodes due to homophily and/or network influence. Distinguishing between these two influences is an important goal in network analysis, and generalized estimating equation (GEE) analyses of longitudinal dyadic network data are an attractive approach. It is not known to what extent such regressions can accurately extract underlying data generating processes. Therefore our primary objective is to determine to what extent, and under what conditions, does the GEE-approach recreate the actual dynamics in an agent-based model.

Methods

We generated simulated cohorts with pre-specified network characteristics and attachments in both static and dynamic networks, and we varied the presence of homophily and network influence. We then used statistical regression and examined the GEE model performance in each cohort to determine whether the model was able to detect the presence of homophily and network influence.

Results

In cohorts with both static and dynamic networks, we find that the GEE models have excellent sensitivity and reasonable specificity for determining the presence or absence of network influence, but little ability to distinguish whether or not homophily is present.

Conclusions

The GEE models are a valuable tool to examine for the presence of network influence in longitudinal data, but are quite limited with respect to homophily.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Christakis NA, Fowler JH. The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:370–9.CrossRefPubMed Christakis NA, Fowler JH. The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:370–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Steglich C, Snijders TAB, Pearson M. DYNAMIC NETWORKS AND BEHAVIOR: SEPARATING SELECTION FROM INFLUENCE: separating selection from influence. Sociol Methodol. 2010;40:329–93.CrossRef Steglich C, Snijders TAB, Pearson M. DYNAMIC NETWORKS AND BEHAVIOR: SEPARATING SELECTION FROM INFLUENCE: separating selection from influence. Sociol Methodol. 2010;40:329–93.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Aral S, Muchnik L, Sundararajan A. Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106:21544–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Aral S, Muchnik L, Sundararajan A. Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106:21544–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Valente TW. Social Networks and Health: Models, Methods, and Applications. 1 edition. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010.CrossRef Valente TW. Social Networks and Health: Models, Methods, and Applications. 1 edition. Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Valente TW. Network Models of Diffusion of Innovation. Cresskill: Hampton Press; 1995. Valente TW. Network Models of Diffusion of Innovation. Cresskill: Hampton Press; 1995.
7.
go back to reference O’Malley AJ, Elwert F, Rosenquist JN, Zaslavsky AM, Christakis NA. Estimating peer effects in longitudinal dyadic data using instrumental variables: Causal Inference for Peer Effects. Biometrics. 2014;70:506–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O’Malley AJ, Elwert F, Rosenquist JN, Zaslavsky AM, Christakis NA. Estimating peer effects in longitudinal dyadic data using instrumental variables: Causal Inference for Peer Effects. Biometrics. 2014;70:506–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference An W. Instrumental variables estimates of peer effects in social networks. Soc Sci Res. 2015;50:382–94.CrossRefPubMed An W. Instrumental variables estimates of peer effects in social networks. Soc Sci Res. 2015;50:382–94.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.CrossRef Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.CrossRef
10.
11.
go back to reference Cohen-Cole E, Fletcher JM. Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs. environmental factors in the obesity epidemic. J Health Econ. 2008;27:1382–7.CrossRefPubMed Cohen-Cole E, Fletcher JM. Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs. environmental factors in the obesity epidemic. J Health Econ. 2008;27:1382–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference de la Haye K, Robins G, Mohr P, Wilson C. Homophily and contagion as explanations for weight similarities among adolescent friends. J Adolesc Health Off Publ Soc Adolesc Med. 2011;49:421–7.CrossRef de la Haye K, Robins G, Mohr P, Wilson C. Homophily and contagion as explanations for weight similarities among adolescent friends. J Adolesc Health Off Publ Soc Adolesc Med. 2011;49:421–7.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shalizi CR, Thomas AC. Homophily and Contagion Are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies. Sociol Methods Res. 2011;40:211–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shalizi CR, Thomas AC. Homophily and Contagion Are Generically Confounded in Observational Social Network Studies. Sociol Methods Res. 2011;40:211–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Lyons R. The Spread of Evidence-Poor Medicine via Flawed Social-Network Analysis. Stat Polit Policy. 2011;2:1–26. Lyons R. The Spread of Evidence-Poor Medicine via Flawed Social-Network Analysis. Stat Polit Policy. 2011;2:1–26.
18.
go back to reference Dawes RM. The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. Am. Psychol. 1979;571–82. Dawes RM. The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. Am. Psychol. 1979;571–82.
19.
go back to reference Lumley T, Diehr P, Emerson S, Chen L. The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002;23:151–69.CrossRefPubMed Lumley T, Diehr P, Emerson S, Chen L. The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002;23:151–69.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Noel H, Nyhan B. The “unfriending” problem: The consequences of homophily in friendship retention for causal estimates of social influence. Soc Netw. 2011;33:211–8.CrossRef Noel H, Nyhan B. The “unfriending” problem: The consequences of homophily in friendship retention for causal estimates of social influence. Soc Netw. 2011;33:211–8.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference StataCorp. College Station. TX: StataCorp LP; 2009. StataCorp. College Station. TX: StataCorp LP; 2009.
23.
go back to reference Kauermann G, Carroll RJ. A Note on the Efficiency of Sandwich Covariance Matrix Estimation. J Am Stat Assoc. 2001;96:1387–96.CrossRef Kauermann G, Carroll RJ. A Note on the Efficiency of Sandwich Covariance Matrix Estimation. J Am Stat Assoc. 2001;96:1387–96.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Aral S. Commentary - Identifying Social Influence: A Comment on Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion. Marketing Science. 2011;30:217–23. Aral S. Commentary - Identifying Social Influence: A Comment on Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion. Marketing Science. 2011;30:217–23.
25.
go back to reference Burt RS. Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence. Am J Sociol. 1987;92:1287–335.CrossRef Burt RS. Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence. Am J Sociol. 1987;92:1287–335.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Moody J. Race, School Integration, and Friendship Segregation in America. Am J Sociol. 2001;107:679–716.CrossRef Moody J. Race, School Integration, and Friendship Segregation in America. Am J Sociol. 2001;107:679–716.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001;27:415–44.CrossRef McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001;27:415–44.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Can longitudinal generalized estimating equation models distinguish network influence and homophily? An agent-based modeling approach to measurement characteristics
Authors
Kori Sauser Zachrison
Theodore J. Iwashyna
Achamyeleh Gebremariam
Meghan Hutchins
Joyce M Lee
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0274-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2016 Go to the issue