Empirical assessment of programs to promote collaboration: A network model approach

Katherine R. McLaughlin; Joshua D. EmBree

doi:10.1214/17-AOAS1114

March 2018 Empirical assessment of programs to promote collaboration: A network model approach

Katherine R. McLaughlin, Joshua D. EmBree

Ann. Appl. Stat. 12(1): 654-682 (March 2018). DOI: 10.1214/17-AOAS1114

Abstract

Collaboration networks are thought to be desirable to foster both individual and population productivity. Often programs are implemented to promote collaboration, for example, at academic institutions. However, few tools are available to assess the efficacy of these programs, and very few are data-driven. We carried out a survey at California State University, San Marcos during the 2012–2013 academic year to measure five types of collaboration ties among professors in five science departments at the university over time. During the time period of study, professors participated in NIH-sponsored curriculum development activities with members of other departments. It was hypothesized that participation in these activities would also foster overall collaboration between these departments.

This survey enables the exploration of several methodological and theoretical challenges in network research. In this paper we develop a statistical approach to assess the impact of programmatic interventions on collaboration using model-assisted social network analysis. We derive and implement a hierarchical Bayesian approach to modeling error-prone responses in surveys and examine the effect of an intervention on network structure. Based on this analysis we find an increase in educational collaboration over time after adjusting for the length of time each professor had to form collaborative ties at the university.

References

1.

Borgatti, S. P., Carley, K. M. and Krackhardt, D. (2006). On the robustness of centrality measures under conditions of imperfect data. Soc. Netw. 28 124–136.Borgatti, S. P., Carley, K. M. and Krackhardt, D. (2006). On the robustness of centrality measures under conditions of imperfect data. Soc. Netw. 28 124–136.

2.

Butts, C. T. (2003). Network inference, error, and informant (in)accuracy: A Bayesian approach. Soc. Netw. 25 103–140.Butts, C. T. (2003). Network inference, error, and informant (in)accuracy: A Bayesian approach. Soc. Netw. 25 103–140.

3.

Butts, C. T., Acton, R. M. and Marcum, C. S. (2012). Interorganizational collaboration in the hurricane Katrina response. J. Soc. Struct. 13.Butts, C. T., Acton, R. M. and Marcum, C. S. (2012). Interorganizational collaboration in the hurricane Katrina response. J. Soc. Struct. 13.

4.

Cross, J. E., Dickmann, E., Newman-Gonchar, R. and Fagan, J. M. (2009). Using mixed-method design and network analysis to measure development of interagency collaboration. Am J. Eval. 30 310–29.Cross, J. E., Dickmann, E., Newman-Gonchar, R. and Fagan, J. M. (2009). Using mixed-method design and network analysis to measure development of interagency collaboration. Am J. Eval. 30 310–29.

5.

Eisenberg, M. and Swanson, N. (1996). Organizational network analysis as a tool for program evaluation. Evaluation & the Health Professions 19 488–506.Eisenberg, M. and Swanson, N. (1996). Organizational network analysis as a tool for program evaluation. Evaluation & the Health Professions 19 488–506.

6.

Frey, B. B., Lohmeier, J. H., Lee, S. W. and Tollefson, N. (2006). Measuring collaboration among grant partners. Am J. Eval. 27 383–392.Frey, B. B., Lohmeier, J. H., Lee, S. W. and Tollefson, N. (2006). Measuring collaboration among grant partners. Am J. Eval. 27 383–392.

7.

Gajda, R. (2004). Utilizing collaboration theory to evaluate strategic alliances. Am J. Eval. 25 65–77.Gajda, R. (2004). Utilizing collaboration theory to evaluate strategic alliances. Am J. Eval. 25 65–77.

8.

Gajda, R. and Koliba, C. (2007). Evaluating the imperative of intraorganizational collaboration: A school improvement perspective. Am J. Eval. 28 26–44.Gajda, R. and Koliba, C. (2007). Evaluating the imperative of intraorganizational collaboration: A school improvement perspective. Am J. Eval. 28 26–44.

9.

Handcock, M. S. and Gile, K. J. (2010). Modeling social networks from sampled data. Ann. Appl. Stat. 4 5–25.Handcock, M. S. and Gile, K. J. (2010). Modeling social networks from sampled data. Ann. Appl. Stat. 4 5–25.

10.

Handcock, M. S., Hunter, D. R., Butts, C. T., Goodreau, S. M., Krivitsky, P. N., Bender-deMoll, S. and Morris, M. (2016). statnet: Software tools for the statistical analysis of network data. The Statnet Project ( http://www.statnet.org). R package version 2016.9.Handcock, M. S., Hunter, D. R., Butts, C. T., Goodreau, S. M., Krivitsky, P. N., Bender-deMoll, S. and Morris, M. (2016). statnet: Software tools for the statistical analysis of network data. The Statnet Project ( http://www.statnet.org). R package version 2016.9.

11.

Krivitsky, P. N. and Handcock, M. S. (2014). A separable model for dynamic networks. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. Stat. Methodol. 76 29–46.Krivitsky, P. N. and Handcock, M. S. (2014). A separable model for dynamic networks. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. Stat. Methodol. 76 29–46.

12.

Loader, C. (2013). locfit: Local regression, likelihood and density estimation. R package version 1.5-9.1.Loader, C. (2013). locfit: Local regression, likelihood and density estimation. R package version 1.5-9.1.

13.

Marcum, C. S., Bevc, C. A. and Butts, C. T. (2012). Mechanisms of control in emergent interorganizational networks. The Policy Studies Journal 40 516–546.Marcum, C. S., Bevc, C. A. and Butts, C. T. (2012). Mechanisms of control in emergent interorganizational networks. The Policy Studies Journal 40 516–546.

14.

Marsden, P. V. (1990). Network data and measurement. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 16 435–463.Marsden, P. V. (1990). Network data and measurement. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 16 435–463.

15.

McCullough, J. (1992). Evaluating grants programs for basic scientific research: Difficult measurement problems, few techniques and slow progress. Am J. Eval. 13 95–101.McCullough, J. (1992). Evaluating grants programs for basic scientific research: Difficult measurement problems, few techniques and slow progress. Am J. Eval. 13 95–101.

16.

Snijders, T. A. B. (1996). Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change. J. Math. Sociol. 21 149–172.Snijders, T. A. B. (1996). Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change. J. Math. Sociol. 21 149–172.

17.

Wang, D. J., Shi, X., McFarland, D. A. and Leskovec, J. (2012). Measurement error in network data: A re-classification. Soc. Netw. 34 396–409.Wang, D. J., Shi, X., McFarland, D. A. and Leskovec, J. (2012). Measurement error in network data: A re-classification. Soc. Netw. 34 396–409.

18.

Woodland, R. H. and Hutton, M. S. (2012). Evaluating organizational collaborations: Suggested entry points and strategies. Am J. Eval. 33 366–383.Woodland, R. H. and Hutton, M. S. (2012). Evaluating organizational collaborations: Suggested entry points and strategies. Am J. Eval. 33 366–383.

Citation Download Citation

Katherine R. McLaughlin and Joshua D. EmBree "Empirical assessment of programs to promote collaboration: A network model approach," The Annals of Applied Statistics 12(1), 654-682, (March 2018). https://doi.org/10.1214/17-AOAS1114

Received: 1 December 2016; Published: March 2018

Access the abstract

JOURNAL ARTICLE
29 PAGES

DOWNLOAD PDF + SAVE TO MY LIBRARY