Katherine Ognyanova & David Lazer (Northeastern University)Michael Neblo, William Minozzi (OSU) & Brian Rubineau (Cornell University)

Ties that bind across contexts: personality and the structure of multiple networks

Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining, NetSci 2014, Berkeley CA

Networks and individual characteristics

Much of current research on the subject focuses on:

Personality traits and multiple networks

• Ego networks (potentially overlapping) rather than full network data

E1 E1

• Cross-sectional design rather than longitudinal network data

T1 T2

• Unilpelx ties (most often friendship) rather than multiplex network data

A B

(Balthazard, Potter, & Warren, 2004; Brass, 2011; Clifton, 2014; Dolgova, van Olffen, Bosch, & Volberda, 2010; Kalish & Robins, 2006; Klein, Lim, Saltz, & Mayer, 2004; Kogovšek, Coenders, & Hlebec, 2013; Labianca, 2014;

Lönnqvist, Itkonen, Verkasalo, & Poutvaara, 2014; Mondak, Hibbing, Canache, Seligson, & Anderson, 2010; Roberts, Wilson, Fedurek, & Dunbar, 2008; Staiano et al., 2012; Stopczynski et al., 2014; Vanbrabant et al., 2012;

Venkatanathan, Karapanos, Kostakos, & Goncalves, 2012; Wehrli, 2008; Zywica & Danowski, 2008)

Full network data collected:• 568 to 776 participants per wave. Response rate is

75% to 100% . New students: 25%-30% per year.

Data Collection

Dormitories in 14 universities, 9 states:• Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,

Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin

Waves: twice a year 2008, 2010-2013• Network, demographic, political and other variables

collected in August and November of each year.

Multiple Network Ties

Friendship Study togetherSpend time together

Dislike / do not get alongHold in esteem Discuss political issues

Network Descriptives I

Academic Dislike Esteem Friendship Politics Time

Network Descriptives II

Academic Dislike Esteem Friendship Politics Time

Percent overlap among the six networks

• Seeks new experiences,accepts unconventional ideas,curious, imaginative.

Openness

• Self-disciplined and organized,pays attention to detail, focused on task completion.

Conscientiousness

• Enjoys of social interactions, energetic, enthusiastic, assertive,focused on the external world.

Extraversion

• Places a high value on compromise and cooperation, considerate, trusting, optimistic.

Agreeableness

• High levels of anxiety, stress,emotional instability, tendency to experience negative emotions.

Neuroticism

Big five personality traits

Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI)

Rate the extent to which the pair of traits applies to you:

• Extraverted, enthusiastic1

• Critical, quarrelsome2

• Dependable, self disciplined3

• Anxious, easily upset4

• Open to new experiences, complex5

• Reserved, quiet6

• Sympathetic, warm7

• Disorganized, careless8

• Calm, emotionally stable9

• Conventional, uncreative10

Sample Descriptives I

Total

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

2012

2013

Sample Descriptives II

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness

Personality traits

2

4

10

8

6

● ● ●

●

8.1

4.4

7.77.26.9

Traits by Gender

♂♀Agreeableness

NeuroticismOpenness

Conscientiousness

Extraversion

Personality and Network Degree

H1: Extraversion positively associated with indegree(Roberts, Wilson, Fedurek, & Dunbar, 2008; Vanbrabant et al., 2012; Wehrli, 2008)

Friends Politics Time Academic Esteem Dislike

2012

All .189 .140 .204 .070 .039 .106

Female .191 .059 .151 .077 .053 -.009

Male .194 .177 .233 .077 .037 .141

2013

All .186 .115 .215 .094 .011 .061

Female .133 .010 .201 .031 -.011 .130

Male .204 .151 .225 .112 .018 .042

2013

-201

2 All .080 .016 .029 .048 .097 -.102

Female .245 .134 .203 .118 .304 -.111

Male .028 -.017 -.021 .029 .036 -.098Non-significant Significant

Personality and Network Degree

H2: Agreeableness positively associated with indegreein friendship networks, but negatively in adversarial networks

(Klein, Lim, Saltz, & Mayer, 2004)

Friends Politics Time Academic Esteem Dislike

2012

All .019 -.104 -.031 -.029 .044 -.120

Female .039 -.017 -.039 .081 .138 -.268

Male .035 -.080 .010 -.024 .027 -.078

2013

All .039 -.037 -.020 .037 .092 -.173

Female .005 -.018 .034 .063 .043 -.079

Male .058 -.013 -.013 .046 .109 -.199

2013

-201

2 All -.004 -.052 -.071 -.030 .003 -.034

Female -.006 -.088 -.101 -.054 .035 -.088

Male -.004 -.040 -.062 -.023 -.008 -.018Non-significant Significant

Personality and Network Degree

H3: Neuroticism negatively associated with indegreein friendship and positively in adversarial networks

(Klein, Lim, Saltz, & Mayer, 2004)

Non-significant Significant

Friends Politics Time Academic Esteem Dislike

2012

All -.051 -.022 -.064 -.041 -.014 .114

Female -.176 -.054 -.114 -.134 -.076 .191

Male .006 .023 -.020 .006 .013 .101

2013

All .006 .044 -.013 -.022 -.050 .176

Female -.001 .119 .006 -.041 -.091 .113

Male .009 .029 -.014 -.014 -.038 .196

2013

-201

2 All .015 .031 .022 .045 .027 .109

Female -.129 -.006 -.108 -.016 .002 .035

Male .060 .051 .070 .069 .044 .133

Personality and Transitive Closure

H4: Extraversion negatively associated with transitivity(Staiano et al., 2012; Kalish & Robins, 2006; Wehrli, 2008)

Friends Politics Time Academic Esteem Dislike

2012

All -.090 -.065 .038 -.072 -.030 -.051

Female .033 .043 .047 .013 .072 .000

Male -.132 -.103 .038 -.097 -.066 -.069

2013

All -.059 -.029 -.079 -.074 -.094 -.054

Female -.098 .033 -.086 -.039 .010 -.112

Male -.043 -.049 -.074 -.081 -.125 -.034

2013

-201

2 All -.023 .021 -.122 -.012 -.034 -.021

Female -.059 .136 -.147 -.051 .007 -.125

Male -.014 -.023 -.117 -.005 -.045 .006Non-significant Significant

Personality and Transitive Closure

H5: Neuroticism negatively associated with transitivity(Staiano et al., 2012; Kalish & Robins, 2006; Wehrli, 2008)

Non-significant Significant

Friends Politics Time Academic Esteem Dislike

2012

All -.050 .027 -.071 -.043 .072 -.002

Female -.113 -.005 -.107 -.081 .069 -.061

Male -.010 .042 -.047 -.014 .065 .007

2013

All .010 .051 .047 .016 .044 -.125

Female -.007 -.020 .090 .087 .011 -.019

Male .022 .072 .039 -.002 .056 -.154

2013

-201

2 All -.056 .001 .024 -.063 -.039 -.024

Female -.123 .018 .112 .031 -.001 .107

Male -.039 -.012 -.006 -.093 -.049 -.073

Research in progress: coming up next

Examine dyadic dependencies in the data:• Not only individual personality characteristics,

but also different dyadic combinations.

Examine tie strength in addition to structure:• Different patterns of weak/strong ties

based on personality traits.

Running actor-based stochastic models:• Siena models including controls for homophily,

key structural signatures, etc.

Related Studies: Political Knowledge

Related Studies: Political Participation

Contact Information:Katya Ognyanova, Northeastern UniversityE-mail: kateto@gmail.comWebsites: lazerlab.net kateto.net

Thank you!