Literature DB >> 31406337

Homophily and minority-group size explain perception biases in social networks.

Eun Lee1, Fariba Karimi2,3, Claudia Wagner4,5, Hang-Hyun Jo6,7,8, Markus Strohmaier4,9, Mirta Galesic10,11,12.   

Abstract

People's perceptions about the size of minority groups in social networks can be biased, often showing systematic over- or underestimation. These social perception biases are often attributed to biased cognitive or motivational processes. Here we show that both over- and underestimation of the size of a minority group can emerge solely from structural properties of social networks. Using a generative network model, we show that these biases depend on the level of homophily, its asymmetric nature and on the size of the minority group. Our model predictions correspond well with empirical data from a cross-cultural survey and with numerical calculations from six real-world networks. We also identify circumstances under which individuals can reduce their biases by relying on perceptions of their neighbours. This work advances our understanding of the impact of network structure on social perception biases and offers a quantitative approach for addressing related issues in society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31406337      PMCID: PMC6839769          DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Hum Behav        ISSN: 2397-3374


  8 in total

1.  The extent and drivers of gender imbalance in neuroscience reference lists.

Authors:  Jordan D Dworkin; Kristin A Linn; Erin G Teich; Perry Zurn; Russell T Shinohara; Danielle S Bassett
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 2.  Advances in the agent-based modeling of economic and social behavior.

Authors:  Mitja Steinbacher; Matthias Raddant; Fariba Karimi; Eva Camacho Cuena; Simone Alfarano; Giulia Iori; Thomas Lux
Journal:  SN Bus Econ       Date:  2021-07-07

3.  Gendered Citation Practices in the Field of Communication.

Authors:  X Wang; J D Dworkin; D Zhou; J Stiso; E B Falk; D S Bassett; P Zurn; D M Lydon-Staley
Journal:  Ann Int Commun Assoc       Date:  2021-07-30

4.  Echo chambers and information transmission biases in homophilic and heterophilic networks.

Authors:  Fernando Diaz-Diaz; Maxi San Miguel; Sandro Meloni
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 4.996

Review 5.  Human social sensing is an untapped resource for computational social science.

Authors:  Mirta Galesic; Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Jonas Dalege; Scott L Feld; Frauke Kreuter; Henrik Olsson; Drazen Prelec; Daniel L Stein; Tamara van der Does
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  The paradox of second-order homophily in networks.

Authors:  Anna Evtushenko; Jon Kleinberg
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Friendship paradox biases perceptions in directed networks.

Authors:  Nazanin Alipourfard; Buddhika Nettasinghe; Andrés Abeliuk; Vikram Krishnamurthy; Kristina Lerman
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  Privacy and uniqueness of neighborhoods in social networks.

Authors:  Daniele Romanini; Sune Lehmann; Mikko Kivelä
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.