The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Social Networks: Econometrics

  • Yann Bramoullé
  • Bernard Fortin
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2902

Abstract

In a social network, agents have their own reference group which may influence their behaviour. In turn, the agents’ attributes and their behaviour affect the formation and the structure of the social network. This paper surveys the econometric literature on both aspects of social networks, and discusses the identification and estimation issues they raise.

Keywords

Identification Mutual consent Network formation Pair-wise regressions Peer effects Separability Social network 

JEL Classifications

D85 L14 Z13 C3 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Habiba Djebbari and Marcel Fafchamps for helpful comments.

Bibliography

  1. Bertrand, M., E.F.P. Luttmer, and S. Mullainathan. 2000. Network effects and welfare cultures. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1019–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bramoullé, Y., and B. Rogers. 2009. Diversity and popularity in social networks. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  3. Bramoullé, Y., H. Djebbari, and B. Fortin. 2009. Identification of peer effects through social networks. Journal of Econometrics 150: 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brock, W., and S. Durlauf. 2001. Interaction-based models. In Handbook of econometrics, vol. 5, ed. J. Heckman and E. Leamer. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  5. Calvó-Armengol, A., E. Patacchini, and Y. Zenou. 2009. Peer effects and social networks in education. The Review of Economic Studies 76: 1239–1267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, A., and Y. Loheac. 2007. It wasn’t me, it was them! Social influence in risky behaviour by adolescents. Journal of Health Economics 26: 763–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cliff, A., and J.K. Ord. 1981. Spatial processes. London: Pion.Google Scholar
  8. Comola, M., and M. Fafchamps. 2009. Testing unilateral versus bilateral link formation. CEPR discussion paper no. DP7406.Google Scholar
  9. Conley, T. 1999. GMM estimation with cross-sectional dependence. Journal of Econometrics 92: 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Conti, G., A. Galeotti, G. Mueller, and S. Pudney. 2009. Popularity. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  11. De Giorgi, G., M. Pellizzari, and S. Redaelli. 2009. Be as careful of the company you keep as of the books you read: Peer effects in education and on the labor market, NBER working paper no. 14948.Google Scholar
  12. De Weerdt, J. 2004. Risk-sharing and endogenous network formation. In Insurance against poverty, ed. S. Dercon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Dercon, S., and J. De Weerdt. 2006. Risk-sharing networks and insurance against illness. Journal of Development Economics 812: 337–356.Google Scholar
  14. Fafchamps, M., and F. Grubert. 2007. Risk sharing networks in rural Philippines. Journal of Development Economics 71: 261–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaviria, A., and S. Raphael. 2001. School based peer effects and juvenile behavior. The Review of Economics and Statistics 832: 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson, M. 2008. Social and economic networks. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Jackson, M., and B. Rogers. 2007. Meeting strangers and friends of friends: How random are social networks? American Economic Review 973: 890–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krishnan, P., and E. Sciubba. 2009. Links and architecture in village networks. Economic Journal 119: 917–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Laschever, R. 2008. The Doughboys Network: Social interactions and the employment of World War I veterans. Working paper, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  20. Lee, L.F. 2007. Identification and estimation of econometric models with group interactions, contextual factors and fixed effects. Journal of Econometrics 1402: 333–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee, L. F., X. Liu, and X. Lin. 2009. Specification and estimation of social interaction models with network structure, contextual factors, correlation, and fixed effects. Mimeo, Department of Economics, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  22. Lin, X. 2008. Identifying peer effects in student academic achievement by spatial autoregressive models with group unobservables. Mimeo, Department of Economics, Tsinghyua University, Beijing.Google Scholar
  23. Manski, C. 1993. Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Review of Economic Studies 603: 531–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayer, A., and S. Puller. 2008. The old boy and girl network: Social network formation on university campuses. Journal of Public Economics 92: 329–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mihaly, K. 2007. Too popular for school? Friendship formation and academic achievement. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  26. Newman, M., A.L. Barabási, and D. Watts. 2006. The structure and dynamics of networks. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Sacerdote, B. 2001. Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Darmouth roommates. Quarterly Journal of Economics 1162: 681–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Santos, P., and C. Barrett. 2008. Identity, interest and information search in a dynamic rural economy. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  29. Snijders, T., P. Pattison, G. Robins, and M. Handcock. 2006. New specifications for exponential random graph models. Sociological Methodology 54: 99–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Trogdon, J., J. Nonnemaker, and J. Pais. 2008. Peer effects in adolescent overweight. Journal of Health Economics 275: 1388–1399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Udry, C., and T. Conley. 2005. Social networks in Ghana. In The social economics of poverty: Identities, groups, communities and networks, ed. C.B. Barrett. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Weinberg, B. 2007. Social interactions and endogenous association, NBER working paper no. W13038.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yann Bramoullé
    • 1
  • Bernard Fortin
    • 1
  1. 1.