Volume 62, Issue 1

MCMC estimation for the p2 network regression model with crossed random effects

Bonne J. H. Zijlstra

Corresponding Author

Department of Educational Sciences/IOPS, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Correspondence should be addressed to Bonne J. H. Zijlstra, Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130, 1018 VZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e‐mail: b.j.h.zijlstra@uva.nl).Search for more papers by this author
Marijtje A. J. van Duijn

Department of Sociology/ICS/IOPS, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Tom A. B. Snijders

Department of Sociology/ICS, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 10 January 2011
Citations: 9

Abstract

The p2 model is a statistical model for the analysis of binary relational data with covariates, as occur in social network studies. It can be characterized as a multinomial regression model with crossed random effects that reflect actor heterogeneity and dependence between the ties from and to the same actor in the network. Three Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) estimation methods for the p2 model are presented to improve iterative generalized least squares (IGLS) estimation developed earlier, two of which use random walk proposals. The third method, an independence chain sampler, and one of the random walk algorithms use normal approximations of the binary network data to generate proposals in the MCMC algorithms. A large‐scale simulation study compares MCMC estimates with IGLS estimates for networks with 20 and 40 actors. It was found that the IGLS estimates have a smaller variance but are severely biased, while the MCMC estimates have a larger variance with a small bias. For networks with 20 actors, mean squared errors are generally comparable or smaller for the IGLS estimates. For networks with 40 actors, mean squared errors are the smallest for the MCMC estimates. Coverage rates of confidence intervals are good for the MCMC estimates but not for the IGLS estimates.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 9

  • Network data, , 10.1016/bs.hoe.2020.05.001, (2020).
  • Maximum likelihood estimation based on the Laplace approximation for network regression models, Statistica Neerlandica, 10.1111/stan.12223, 0, 0, (2020).
  • Regression of directed graphs on independent effects for density and reciprocity, The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 10.1080/0022250X.2017.1387858, 41, 4, (185-192), (2017).
  • Will you be my friend? A multilevel network analysis of friendships of students with and without special educational needs backgrounds in inclusive classroomsWillst du mein Freund sein? Eine Mehrebenennetzwerkanalyse von Freundschaften von Schulkindern mit einem und ohne einen sonderpädagogischen Förderbedarf in inklusiven Klassen, Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 10.1007/s11618-017-0767-x, 20, 3, (449-474), (2017).
  • Adjustment of issue positions based on network strategies in an election campaign: A two-mode network autoregression model with cross-nested random effects, Social Networks, 10.1016/j.socnet.2011.03.002, 35, 2, (168-177), (2013).
  • Computational Statistical Methods for Social Network Models, Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 10.1080/10618600.2012.732921, 21, 4, (856-882), (2012).
  • Networks of action and events over time. A multilevel discrete-time event history model for longitudinal network data, Social Networks, 10.1016/j.socnet.2010.09.003, 33, 1, (31-40), (2011).
  • Victims and their defenders: A dyadic approach, International Journal of Behavioral Development, 10.1177/0165025410378068, 35, 2, (144-151), (2010).
  • Ethnic segregation in context: Social discrimination among native Dutch pupils and their ethnic minority classmates, Social Networks, 10.1016/j.socnet.2009.06.002, 31, 4, (230-239), (2009).