Testing association patterns: issues arising and extensions

By Hal Whitehead, L. Bejder, C. A. Ottensmeyer. 2005

174 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Genetics, Small Animals

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c32c9d289004f77434539b0c926c63275826d958

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Genetics

In Small Animals

Citations in the corpus

Do social networks of female northern long-eared bats vary with reproductive period and age? (2010, methodology): “…matrices were generated by permuting observed matrices, where pairwise associations were altered but the total number of individuals and the number of groups from the original matrix were conserved (Bejder et al. 1998; Manly 1995; Miklós and Podani 2004; Whitehead 1999; Whitehead et al. 2005).”
Animal social network inference and permutations for ecologists in R using asnipe (2013, background): “Several authors have also suggested improvements to the data stream permutation method, such as ran-domizing while controlling for space, time or type of individual (Whitehead 1999; Whitehead et al. 2005; Sundaresan et al. 2009).”
Female bisexual kinship ties maintain social cohesion in a dolphin network (2010, methodology): “To determine whether dolphins differ significantly in sociability, schools were permuted 40 000 times, keeping the number of individuals in each school and the number of schools in which each individual was observed constant (Whitehead et al. 2005).”
Who Cares? Between-group variation in alloparental caregiving in sperm whales (2009, methodology): “A permutation test, as in Bejder et al. (1998) with modifications as in Whitehead et al. (2005), in which observed associations among individuals are permuted within 2-h sampling periods, was used to test whether calves had preferred/ avoided associations with adults against the null hypotheses…”
Social cohesion in a hierarchically structured embayment population of Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins (2009, methodology): “All social and network structure analyses were run in SOCPROG, version 2.3 (Whitehead et al. 2005) in MatLab 7.0.4 (Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA, U.S.A.).”
Organization of Group Members at Departure Is Driven by Social Structure in Macaca (2008, methodology): “…the following standard network properties: mean association, density, and eigenvector centrality coefficient, which we calculated via SOCPROG 2.3 (Girvan and Newman 2002; Newman 2004; Newman and Girvan 2004; Sundaresan et al. 2007; Wasserman and Faust 1994; Whitehead 1997; Whitehead et al. 2005).”
SOCPROG programs: analysing animal social structures (2009, unknown): “They are based upon the procedure outlined by Bejder et al. (1998), although they contain extensions and modifications to deal with issues that have come to light in recent years (Miklós and Podani 2004; Whitehead 1999; Whitehead et al. 2005).”
Precision and power in the analysis of social structure using associations (2008, background): “(1998) test, for instance, allowing definitions of association not based upon group membership (such as nearest neighbours) and controlling for demographic events such as birth, death and movements of animals into and out of the study area (Whitehead 1999; Whitehead et al. 2005).”
Social network analysis of animal behaviour : a promising tool for the study of sociality (2008, methodology): “One possible way to examine how temporal limitations may change network measures is to use permutation methods (Bejder et al. 1998; Whitehead 1999; Whitehead et al. 2005) to compare network measures calculated from permuted networks with measures calculated from the original networks.”
Potential banana skins in animal social network analysis (2009, methodology): “It may be that other measures, such as the coefficient of variation in association strength, suggested by Whitehead et al. (2005), may prove more portable.”
Association networks in spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) (2009, background): “As Whitehead et al. (2005) suggest, when the CV is larger in the original data set than in the permuted sets, even if the mean association index is not different, there is evidence for active companionship (or avoidance) because some dyads might be associating more (or less) than would be expected…”