To binarize or not to binarize

Relational data and the construction of archaeological networks

Matthew Peeples, John M. Roberts

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Over the last several years, network methods and models from the social and physical sciences have gained considerable popularity in archaeology. Many of the most common network methods begin with the creation of binary networks where links among some set of actors are defined as either present or absent. In most archaeological cases, however, the presence or absence of a specific kind of relationship between actors is not straightforward as we must rely on material proxies for assessing connections. A common approach in recent studies has been to define some threshold for the presence of a tie by partitioning continuous relational data among sites (e.g., artifact frequency or similarity data). In this article, using an example from the U.S. Southwest, we present a sensitivity analysis focused on the potential effects of defining binary networks from continuous relational data. We show that many key network properties that are often afforded social interpretations are fundamentally influenced by the assumptions used to define connections. We suggest that, although network graphs provide powerful visualizations of network data, methods for creating and analyzing weighted (non-binarized) networks often provide a better characterization of specific network properties.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3001-3010
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Archaeological Science
Volume40
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

data network
Archaeology
visualization
popularity
archaeology
artifact
interpretation
present
science
Sensitivity Analysis
Artifact
Physical Science
Social Sciences
Visualization
Graph
US Southwest

Keywords

  • Network centrality
  • Sensitivity analysis
  • Social network analysis
  • U.S. Southwest

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Archaeology

Cite this

To binarize or not to binarize : Relational data and the construction of archaeological networks. / Peeples, Matthew; Roberts, John M.

In: Journal of Archaeological Science, Vol. 40, No. 7, 07.2013, p. 3001-3010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f9185716e83d4763b803a184744baa3a,
title = "To binarize or not to binarize: Relational data and the construction of archaeological networks",
abstract = "Over the last several years, network methods and models from the social and physical sciences have gained considerable popularity in archaeology. Many of the most common network methods begin with the creation of binary networks where links among some set of actors are defined as either present or absent. In most archaeological cases, however, the presence or absence of a specific kind of relationship between actors is not straightforward as we must rely on material proxies for assessing connections. A common approach in recent studies has been to define some threshold for the presence of a tie by partitioning continuous relational data among sites (e.g., artifact frequency or similarity data). In this article, using an example from the U.S. Southwest, we present a sensitivity analysis focused on the potential effects of defining binary networks from continuous relational data. We show that many key network properties that are often afforded social interpretations are fundamentally influenced by the assumptions used to define connections. We suggest that, although network graphs provide powerful visualizations of network data, methods for creating and analyzing weighted (non-binarized) networks often provide a better characterization of specific network properties.",
keywords = "Network centrality, Sensitivity analysis, Social network analysis, U.S. Southwest",
author = "Matthew Peeples and Roberts, {John M.}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "3001--3010",
journal = "Journal of Archaeological Science",
issn = "0305-4403",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - To binarize or not to binarize

T2 - Relational data and the construction of archaeological networks

AU - Peeples, Matthew

AU - Roberts, John M.

PY - 2013/7

Y1 - 2013/7

N2 - Over the last several years, network methods and models from the social and physical sciences have gained considerable popularity in archaeology. Many of the most common network methods begin with the creation of binary networks where links among some set of actors are defined as either present or absent. In most archaeological cases, however, the presence or absence of a specific kind of relationship between actors is not straightforward as we must rely on material proxies for assessing connections. A common approach in recent studies has been to define some threshold for the presence of a tie by partitioning continuous relational data among sites (e.g., artifact frequency or similarity data). In this article, using an example from the U.S. Southwest, we present a sensitivity analysis focused on the potential effects of defining binary networks from continuous relational data. We show that many key network properties that are often afforded social interpretations are fundamentally influenced by the assumptions used to define connections. We suggest that, although network graphs provide powerful visualizations of network data, methods for creating and analyzing weighted (non-binarized) networks often provide a better characterization of specific network properties.

AB - Over the last several years, network methods and models from the social and physical sciences have gained considerable popularity in archaeology. Many of the most common network methods begin with the creation of binary networks where links among some set of actors are defined as either present or absent. In most archaeological cases, however, the presence or absence of a specific kind of relationship between actors is not straightforward as we must rely on material proxies for assessing connections. A common approach in recent studies has been to define some threshold for the presence of a tie by partitioning continuous relational data among sites (e.g., artifact frequency or similarity data). In this article, using an example from the U.S. Southwest, we present a sensitivity analysis focused on the potential effects of defining binary networks from continuous relational data. We show that many key network properties that are often afforded social interpretations are fundamentally influenced by the assumptions used to define connections. We suggest that, although network graphs provide powerful visualizations of network data, methods for creating and analyzing weighted (non-binarized) networks often provide a better characterization of specific network properties.

KW - Network centrality

KW - Sensitivity analysis

KW - Social network analysis

KW - U.S. Southwest

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876466032&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876466032&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.014

DO - 10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.014

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 3001

EP - 3010

JO - Journal of Archaeological Science

JF - Journal of Archaeological Science

SN - 0305-4403

IS - 7

ER -