Journal Home > Volume 1 , Issue 1

This paper poses a question: How many types of social relations can be categorized in the Chinese context? In social networks, the calculation of tie strength can better represent the degree of intimacy of the relationship between nodes, rather than just indicating whether the link exists or not. Previou research suggests that Granovetter measures tie strength so as to distinguish strong ties from weak ties, and the Dunbar circle theory may offer a plausible approach to calculating 5 types of relations according to interaction frequency via unsupervised learning (e.g., clustering interactive data between users in Facebook and Twitter). In this paper, we differentiate the layers of an ego-centered network by measuring the different dimensions of user's online interaction data based on the Dunbar circle theory. To label the types of Chinese guanxi, we conduct a survey to collect the ground truth from the real world and link this survey data to big data collected from a widely used social network platform in China. After repeating the Dunbar experiments, we modify our computing methods and indicators computed from big data in order to have a model best fit for the ground truth. At the same time, a comprehensive set of effective predictors are selected to have a dialogue with existing theories of tie strength. Eventually, by combining Guanxi theory with Dunbar circle studies, four types of guanxi are found to represent a four-layer model of a Chinese ego-centered network.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Predicting Tie Strength of Chinese Guanxi by Using Big Data of Social Networks

Show Author's information Xin GaoJar-Der Luo( )Kunhao YangXiaoming FuLoring LiuWeiwei Gu
Department of Sociology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan.
Institute of Computer Science, University of Göttingen, Göttingen 37077, Germany.
Tencent Computer System Co. Ltd, Shenzhen 518000, China.
Information Science and Technology, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China.

Abstract

This paper poses a question: How many types of social relations can be categorized in the Chinese context? In social networks, the calculation of tie strength can better represent the degree of intimacy of the relationship between nodes, rather than just indicating whether the link exists or not. Previou research suggests that Granovetter measures tie strength so as to distinguish strong ties from weak ties, and the Dunbar circle theory may offer a plausible approach to calculating 5 types of relations according to interaction frequency via unsupervised learning (e.g., clustering interactive data between users in Facebook and Twitter). In this paper, we differentiate the layers of an ego-centered network by measuring the different dimensions of user's online interaction data based on the Dunbar circle theory. To label the types of Chinese guanxi, we conduct a survey to collect the ground truth from the real world and link this survey data to big data collected from a widely used social network platform in China. After repeating the Dunbar experiments, we modify our computing methods and indicators computed from big data in order to have a model best fit for the ground truth. At the same time, a comprehensive set of effective predictors are selected to have a dialogue with existing theories of tie strength. Eventually, by combining Guanxi theory with Dunbar circle studies, four types of guanxi are found to represent a four-layer model of a Chinese ego-centered network.

Keywords: social network, tie strength, Dunbar circle theory, Chinese Guanxi theory, supervised classification model

References(28)

[1]
K. K. Hwang, Face and favor: The Chinese power game, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 944–974, 1987.
[2]
M. S. Granovetter, The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78, no. 6, pp. 1360–1380, 1973.
[3]
M. S. Granovetter, The impact of social structure on economic outcomes, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 19, no.1, pp. 33–50, 2005.
[4]
P. V. Marsden and K. E. Campbell, Measuring tie strength, Social Forces, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 482–501, 1984.
[5]
N. Eagle, A. S. Pentland, and D. Lazer, Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 106, no. 36, pp. 15274–15278, 2009.
[6]
S. G. B. Roberts and R. I. M. Dunbar, Communication in social networks: Effects of kinship, network size, and emotional closeness, Personal Relationships, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 439–452, 2011.
[7]
T. Raeder, O. Lizardo, D. Hachen, and N. V. Chawla, Predictors of short-term decay of cell phone contacts in a large scale communication network, Social Networks, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 245–257, 2011.
[8]
V. Palchykov, K. Kaski, J. Kertész, A. L. Barabási, and R. I. M. Dunbar, Sex differences in intimate relationships, Scientific Reports, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 370, 2012.
[9]
M. I. Akbas, R. N. Avula, M. A. Bassiouni, and D. Turgut, Social network generation and friend ranking based on mobile phone data, in Proc. 2013 IEEE Int. Conf. Communications, Budapest, Hungary, 2013, pp. 1444–1448.
DOI
[10]
V. Arnaboldi, A. Guazzini, and A. Passarella, Egocentric online social networks: Analysis of key features and prediction of tie strength in Facebook, Computer Communications, vol. 36, nos. 10&11, pp. 1130–1144, 2013.
[11]
R. I. M. Dunbar, Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates, Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 469–493, 1992.
[12]
R. I. M. Dunbar, Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 681–694, 1993.
[13]
R. I. M. Dunbar and M. Spoors, Social networks, support cliques, and kinship, Human Nature, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 273–290, 1995.
[14]
R. A. Hill and R. I. M. Dunbar, Social network size in humans, Human Nature, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 53–72, 2003.
[15]
W. X. Zhou, D. Sornette, R. A. Hill, and R. I. M. Dunbar, Discrete hierarchical organization of social group sizes, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 272, no. 1561, pp. 439–444, 2005.
[16]
T. V. Pollet, S. G. B. Roberts, and R. I. M. Dunbar, Use of social network sites and instant messaging does not lead to increased offline social network size, or to emotionally closer relationships with offline network members, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 253–258, 2011.
[17]
S. G. B. Roberts, R. I. M. Dunbar, T. V. Pollet, and T. Kuppens, Exploring variation in active network size: Constraints and ego characteristics, Social Networks, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 138–146, 2009.
[18]
R. S. Burt and K. Burzynska, Chinese entrepreneurs, social networks, and Guanxi, Management and Organization Review, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 221–260, 2017.
[19]
S. M. Liang, The Comparison between Chinese and Western Cultures, (in Chinese). Taipei, China: Li-Ren Publishing House, 1983.
[20]
G. Yang, Chinese Psychology and Behavior: A Study of Localization, (in Chinese). Beijing, China: Renmin University of China Press, 2004.
[21]
Y. Zhang and Z. G. Zhang, Guanxi and organizational dynamics in China: A link between individual and organizational levels, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 375–392, 2006.
[22]
Y. Mao, K. Z. Peng, and C. S. Wong, Indigenous research on Asia: In search of the emic components of Guanxi, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1143–1168, 2012.
[23]
X. Fei, From the Soil, the Foundations of Chinese Society. Beijing, China: Beijing University Press, 1998.
[24]
R. I. M. Dunbar, V. Arnaboldi, M. Conti, and A. Passarella, The structure of online social networks mirrors those in the offline world, Social Networks, vol. 43, pp. 39–47, 2015.
[25]
K. S. Yang, Chinese social orientation: An integrative analysis, in Chinese Societies and Mental Health, T. Y. Lin, W. S. Tseng, and E. K. Yeh, eds. Hong Kong, China: Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 19–39.
[26]
R. Burt, Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press, 1992.
DOI
[27]
N. Lin, W. M. Ensel, and J. C. Vaughn, Social resources and strength of ties: Structural factors in occupational status attainment, American Sociological Review, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 393–405, 1981.
[28]
X. L. Shi, L. A. Adamic, and M. J. Strauss, Networks of strong ties, Physica A, vol. 378, no. 1, pp. 33–47, 2007.
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 31 May 2020
Accepted: 05 July 2020
Published: 28 October 2020
Issue date: September 2020

Copyright

© The author(s) 2020

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the financial support of Tencent Research Institute Project "Research on identification of opinion leaders based on QQ big data", project number: 20182001706, as well as the support of Tsinghua-Gottingen Student Exchange Project IDS-SSP-2017001.

Rights and permissions

The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Return