Two interpretations of reports of knowledge of subpopulation sizes
Two interpretations of reports of knowledge of subpopulation sizes
We asked respondents how many people they knew in many subpopulations. These numbers, averaged over large representative samples, should vary proportionally to the size of the subpopulations. In fact, they do not. We give two different interpretations of this finding. The first interpretation notes that the responses are linear in subpopulation size for small subpopulations, but with a non-zero offset, and become noisier for larger subpopulations. Our explanation assumes that respondents both invent and forget members of their networks in the subpopulations, in addition to guessing when the number concerned becomes large. The second interpretation notes that the responses are well described by a power law response, in which the mean number of subpopulation members reported known varies as the square root of the subpopulation size. Despite the apparent implausibility of this, we suggest a psychological mechanism and a model which is able to reproduce the behaviour. Other recall data are shown to have similar properties, thus widening the relevance of the findings.
Reporting, Estimation, Accuracy, Power law
141-160
Killworth, Peter D.
cdb4e8d3-c5eb-48b8-860a-0b16473b5d44
McCarty, Christopher
0c3e32ea-59b0-437a-aa28-3cec09260655
Bernard, H.Russell
b7e0909c-29cb-4762-ba4f-378fea0f80fb
Johnsen, Eugene C.
b5a7ccfa-d568-463c-8f71-a088028dd434
Domini, John
18a5307e-0c45-424a-86f2-ea60ba65278b
Shelley, Gene A.
d0fb3572-3623-4f94-bc25-02b22e8c40f8
2003
Killworth, Peter D.
cdb4e8d3-c5eb-48b8-860a-0b16473b5d44
McCarty, Christopher
0c3e32ea-59b0-437a-aa28-3cec09260655
Bernard, H.Russell
b7e0909c-29cb-4762-ba4f-378fea0f80fb
Johnsen, Eugene C.
b5a7ccfa-d568-463c-8f71-a088028dd434
Domini, John
18a5307e-0c45-424a-86f2-ea60ba65278b
Shelley, Gene A.
d0fb3572-3623-4f94-bc25-02b22e8c40f8
Killworth, Peter D., McCarty, Christopher, Bernard, H.Russell, Johnsen, Eugene C., Domini, John and Shelley, Gene A.
(2003)
Two interpretations of reports of knowledge of subpopulation sizes.
Social Networks, 25 (2), .
(doi:10.1016/S0378-8733(02)00040-0).
Abstract
We asked respondents how many people they knew in many subpopulations. These numbers, averaged over large representative samples, should vary proportionally to the size of the subpopulations. In fact, they do not. We give two different interpretations of this finding. The first interpretation notes that the responses are linear in subpopulation size for small subpopulations, but with a non-zero offset, and become noisier for larger subpopulations. Our explanation assumes that respondents both invent and forget members of their networks in the subpopulations, in addition to guessing when the number concerned becomes large. The second interpretation notes that the responses are well described by a power law response, in which the mean number of subpopulation members reported known varies as the square root of the subpopulation size. Despite the apparent implausibility of this, we suggest a psychological mechanism and a model which is able to reproduce the behaviour. Other recall data are shown to have similar properties, thus widening the relevance of the findings.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 2003
Keywords:
Reporting, Estimation, Accuracy, Power law
Organisations:
National Oceanography Centre
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 345928
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/345928
ISSN: 0378-8733
PURE UUID: e977f9dc-4ee4-42e4-bcc7-daf1a9f68011
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 05 Dec 2012 17:08
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 12:30
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Peter D. Killworth
Author:
Christopher McCarty
Author:
H.Russell Bernard
Author:
Eugene C. Johnsen
Author:
John Domini
Author:
Gene A. Shelley
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics