2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.03.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Research questions should drive edge definitions in social network studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Ultimately, whether this problem depends on the research question (Carter, Lee, & Marshall, 2015). If edges are intended to simply represent contacts between individuals, then the importance of using approaches that control for gregariousness or location preferences may be diminished because researchers are often more interested in quantifying emergent network structures than uncovering social preferences that drive social network structure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ultimately, whether this problem depends on the research question (Carter, Lee, & Marshall, 2015). If edges are intended to simply represent contacts between individuals, then the importance of using approaches that control for gregariousness or location preferences may be diminished because researchers are often more interested in quantifying emergent network structures than uncovering social preferences that drive social network structure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Community 1 was gradually split into three separate communities; most of the other foxes that changed community were subordinates and did so in autumn or winter, when increased extraterritorial movements [57] lead to higher inter-group encounter rates [52]. This may make social groups appear less distinct: communities are far easier to define when connections are rare between, and common within, groups [101]. It could also be that fox communities overlap [102], but this seems unlikely in a territorial species.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our study provides evidence that using a network of VR2W acoustic receivers may not be judicious in exploring the social network of a benthic shark species at its mating aggregation due to potential low rate of movements over large spatial scales. We therefore encourage marine ecologists to think about the ecological research questions considered and the scales and contexts at which they can be answered [ 29 ]. Broad networks of acoustic receivers with large detection ranges (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As research questions should drive edge definition in social networks [ 29 , 30 ], it is important to consider whether different scale-dependent methods of network construction are appropriate to estimate realistic social encounters, especially in large marine benthic animals, which spend most of the day resting on the bottom. Animal social networks are often constructed from proximity data on the spatio-temporal co-occurrence of identifiable subjects as a proxy for interaction networks [ 5 , 31 ], but the validity of this assumption has rarely been tested despite the importance of defining edges in social networks [ 29 , 30 ]. Despite the appealing use of acoustic receivers to automatically build social networks in aquatic animals, such method might not be effective because of broad detection ranges.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%