No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Towards a computational network theory of social groups
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2022
Abstract
Network theory is necessary for the realization of cognitive representations and resulting empirical observations of social groups. We propose that the triadic primitives denoting individual roles are multilayer, with positive and negative relations feeding into cost–benefit calculations. Through this, we advance a computational theory that generalizes to different scales and to contexts where conflict is not present.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Amelio, A., & Pizzuti, C. (2016). An evolutionary and local refinement approach for community detection in signed networks. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 25(04), 1650021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, P. (2015). Reciprocity, transitivity, and the mysterious three-cycle. Social Networks, 40, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplow, T. (1956). A theory of coalitions in the triad. American Sociological Review, 21(4), 489–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, D., & Harary, F. (1956). Structural balance: A generalization of Heider's theory. Psychological Review, 63(5), 277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doreian, P., & Krackhardt, D. (2001). Pre-transitive balance mechanisms for signed networks. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 25(1), 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doreian, P., & Mrvar, A. (2009). Partitioning signed social networks. Social Networks, 31(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kivelä, M., Arenas, A., Barthelemy, M., Gleeson, J. P., Moreno, Y., & Porter, M. A. (2014). Multilayer networks. Journal of Complex Networks, 2(3), 203–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietraszewski, D., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2014). The content of our cooperation, not the color of our skin: An alliance detection system regulates categorization by coalition and race, but not sex. PLoS One, 9(2), e88534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redhead, D., Dhaliwal, N., & Cheng, J. T. (2021). Taking charge and stepping in: Individuals who punish are rewarded with prestige and dominance. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(2), e12581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redhead, D., & von Rueden, C. R. (2021). Coalitions and conflict: A longitudinal analysis of men's politics. Evolutionary Human Sciences, 3, E31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, G. (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel (Vol. 92892). Free Press, Macmillan Publishers.Google Scholar
Traag, V. A., & Bruggeman, J. (2009). Community detection in networks with positive and negative links. Physical Review E, 80(3), 036115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Rueden, C. R., Redhead, D., O'Gorman, R., Kaplan, H., & Gurven, M. (2019). The dynamics of men's cooperation and social status in a small-scale society. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286(1908), 20191367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
Toward a computational theory of social groups: A finite set of cognitive primitives for representing any and all social groups in the context of conflict
Related commentaries (29)
A neuroscientific perspective on the computational theory of social groups
Advantages and limitations of representing groups in terms of recursive utilities
Are we there yet? Every computational theory needs a few black boxes, including theories about groups
Beyond folk-sociology: Extending Pietraszewski's model to large-group dynamics
Can group representations based on relational cues warrant the rich inferences typically drawn from group membership?
Coalitionary psychology and group dynamics on social media
Compassion within conflict: Toward a computational theory of social groups informed by maternal brain physiology
Conciliation and meta-contrast are important for understanding how people assign group memberships during conflict situations
Developmental antecedents of representing “group” behavior: A commentary on Pietraszewski's theory of groups
Group? What group? A computational model of the group needs a psychology of “us” (not “them”)
How do we know who may replace each other in triadic conflict roles?
Interacting with others while reacting to the environment
Internal versus external group conflicts
Latent structure learning as an alternative computation for group inference
Learning agents that acquire representations of social groups
More than one way to skin a cat: Addressing the arbitration problem in developmental science
On vagueness and parochialism in psychological research on groups
Paranoia reveals the complexity in assigning individuals to groups on the basis of inferred intentions
Private versus public: A dual model for resource-constrained conflict representations
Psychological and actual group formation: Conflict is neither necessary nor sufficient
Shadow banning, astroturfing, catfishing, and other online conflicts where beliefs about group membership diverge
Shared intentionality and the representation of groups; or, how to build a socially adept robot
Signals and cues of social groups
Social groups and the computational conundrums of delays, proximity, and loyalty
Societies and other kinds of social groups
The labelled container: Conceptual development of social group representations
Towards a computational network theory of social groups
Triadic conflict “primitives” can be reduced to welfare trade-off ratios
Using laboratory intergroup conflict and riots as a “stress test”
Author response
More “us,” less “them”: An appeal for pluralism – and stand-alone computational theorizing – in our science of social groups