IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/17809.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Dynamics of Networks and Homophily

Author

Listed:
  • Jackson, Matthew O.
  • Nei, Stephen
  • Snowberg, Erik
  • Yariv, Leeat

Abstract

We examine friendships and study partnerships among university students over several years. At the aggregate level, connections increase over time, but homophily on gender and ethnicity is relatively constant across time, university residences, and different network layers. At the individual level, homophilous tendencies are persistent across time and network layers. Furthermore, we see assortativity in homophilous tendencies. There is weaker, albeit significant, homophily over malleable characteristics---risk preferences, altruism, study habits, and so on. We find little evidence of assimilation over those characteristics. We also document the nuanced impact of network connections on changes in Grade Point Average.

Suggested Citation

  • Jackson, Matthew O. & Nei, Stephen & Snowberg, Erik & Yariv, Leeat, 2023. "The Dynamics of Networks and Homophily," CEPR Discussion Papers 17809, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:17809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP17809
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Stefano Mosso, 2014. "The Economics of Human Development and Social Mobility," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 689-733, August.
    2. Ben Gillen & Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2019. "Experimenting with Measurement Error: Techniques with Applications to the Caltech Cohort Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1826-1863.
    3. Yann Bramoullé & Andrea Galeotti & Brian Rogers, 2016. "The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Networks," Post-Print hal-01447842, HAL.
    4. Robert Garlick, 2018. "Academic Peer Effects with Different Group Assignment Policies: Residential Tracking versus Random Assignment," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 345-369, July.
    5. Kevin Fosnacht & Robert M. Gonyea & Polly A. Graham, 2020. "The Relationship of First-Year Residence Hall Roommate Assignment Policy with Interactional Diversity and Perceptions of the Campus Environment," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 91(5), pages 781-804, July.
    6. Yann Bramoullé & Andrea Galeotti & Brian Rogers, 2016. "The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Networks," Post-Print hal-03572533, HAL.
    7. Angela Cools & Raquel Fernandez & Eleonora Patacchini, 2019. "Girls, Boys, and High Achievers," Working Papers 2019-032, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    8. Bryan S. Graham, 2016. "Homophily and transitivity in dynamic network formation," CeMMAP working papers CWP16/16, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Bruce Sacerdote, 2001. "Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 681-704.
    10. Mariagiovanna Baccara & Leeat Yariv, 2013. "Homophily in Peer Groups," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 69-96, August.
    11. Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2021. "Testing the Waters: Behavior across Participant Pools," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(2), pages 687-719, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ductor, Lorenzo & Prummer, Anja, 2024. "Gender homophily, collaboration, and output," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 477-492.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yann Bramoullé & Habiba Djebbari & Bernard Fortin, 2020. "Peer Effects in Networks: A Survey," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 603-629, August.
    2. Patacchini, Eleonora & Hsieh, Chih-Sheng & Lin, Xu, 2019. "Social Interaction Methods," CEPR Discussion Papers 14141, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Timothy G. Conley & Nirav Mehta & Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd Stinebrickner, 2024. "Social Interactions, Mechanisms, and Equilibrium: Evidence from a Model of Study Time and Academic Achievement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 132(3), pages 824-866.
    4. Guido M. Kuersteiner & Ingmar R. Prucha, 2020. "Dynamic Spatial Panel Models: Networks, Common Shocks, and Sequential Exogeneity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(5), pages 2109-2146, September.
    5. Beugnot, Julie & Fortin, Bernard & Lacroix, Guy & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Gender and peer effects on performance in social networks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 207-224.
    6. Áureo de Paula, 2015. "Econometrics of network models," CeMMAP working papers CWP52/15, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Timothy Conley & Nirav Mehta & Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd Stinebrickner, 2015. "Social Interactions, Mechanisms, and Equilibrium: Evidence from a Model of Study Time and Academic Achievement," NBER Working Papers 21418, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Pinar Yildirim & Yanhao Wei & Christophe Bulte & Joy Lu, 2020. "Social network design for inducing effort," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 381-417, December.
    9. Inhoffen, Justus & Siemroth, Christoph & Zahn, Philipp, 2019. "Minimum prices and social interactions: Evidence from the German renewable energy program," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 350-364.
    10. Yang Sun & Wei Zhao & Junjie Zhou, 2021. "Structural Interventions in Networks," Papers 2101.12420, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    11. Ambler, Kate & Godlonton, Susan & Recalde, María P., 2021. "Follow the leader? A field experiment on social influence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1280-1297.
    12. Alexandra de Gendre & Nicolás Salamanca, 2020. "On the Mechanisms of Ability Peer Effects," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2020n19, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    13. Boucher, Vincent, 2020. "Equilibrium homophily in networks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    14. Matthew O. Jackson & Brian W. Rogers & Yves Zenou, 2016. "Networks: An Economic Perspective," Papers 1608.07901, arXiv.org.
    15. Chung, Bobby W., 2020. "Peers’ parents and educational attainment: The exposure effect," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    16. Gonzalo Vazquez-Bare, 2017. "Identification and Estimation of Spillover Effects in Randomized Experiments," Papers 1711.02745, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    17. S Anukriti & Catalina Herrera‐Almanza & Praveen K. Pathak & Mahesh Karra, 2020. "Curse of the Mummy‐ji: The Influence of Mothers‐in‐Law on Women in India†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1328-1351, October.
    18. Vasco M. Carvalho & Alireza Tahbaz-Salehi, 2019. "Production Networks: A Primer," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 635-663, August.
    19. Yujiro Kawasaki & Kenmei Tsubota, 2019. "Myopic or farsighted: bilateral trade agreements among three symmetric countries," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 233-256, December.
    20. Oded Stark & Wiktor Budzinski, 2021. "A social‐psychological reconstruction of Amartya Sen’s measures of inequality and social welfare," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 552-566, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Homophily; Social Networks;

    JEL classification:

    • D85 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Network Formation
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • J15 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Minorities, Races, Indigenous Peoples, and Immigrants; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:17809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.