First question-- Of the three we introduced which is the best measure of power in this network?
Would you get a different answer if you analysed the content of the messages, rather than the structure of the network?
question 1. I choose how what we say propagates across the network (how well a person’s information propagates through the network)Because how well a person’s information propagates through the network not only reflects how well the person is concerned but also shows the importance of his(or her) information ,and if one RTs the message ,he must think the information has an impact on himself，so I think it's the best measure of power.
question 2.No, I won't change my answer. Because how well a person’s information propagates through the network reflects the content of the messages is agreed by one RTs it and has its influence. So it's still the best way to judge the power.
question 3.Yes.But there also have other sides need to be considered. Such as network centrality potential refers to the centralization trend of network points, which is calculated according to the following ideas: first, find the maximum centrality value in the graph; then calculate the difference between the value and the centrality of any other point, so as to get multiple "differences"; then calculate the sum of these "differences"; finally divide the sum by the maximum possible value of the sum of each "difference". On the other hand, we can measure the degree of the actor's control over resources or we can measure the ability of an actor to "control" other people's actions. The more such a position an actor occupies in the network, the more it represents its high centrality, and the more actors need to connect through it. Intermediate center potential is also an index to analyze the overall structure of the network, which means the gap between the center of the node with the highest center in the network and the center of the other nodes. The larger the gap between the node and other nodes, the higher the central potential of the network, which means that the nodes in the network may be divided into several small groups and depend too much on the transfer relationship of one node. The node plays an extremely important role in the network.
Question1. I think it's influence. The greater a person's power, the greater his influence. There's no doubt about it, so I think influence is a measure of power.
Question2. I think yes, if we don't analyze the network structure, we won't be able to determine the reliability and authenticity of the content of the article
Question3. Social groups include realistic social and virtual socializing, which
have certain differences, such as the fact that some real-life interactions
cannot be carried out in the web, and that social networks have a more
homogeneous way of generating influence, but this analysis is primarily an
analysis of social networking, not comprehensive enough, and it is important to
analyze the mood of social networks
question1:the best connected(the one who’s in the best position to influence).Because the nods are connected by edges.And edges simply represent associations or connections.And in many real world networds,the more connections.
question 2:Yes.Because the structure have the settled ways to work.
question 3:Yes.Because the measuring this interaction is to count up with people receive the most replies.So when we count those replies ,we see that most people have only got a few .the measure influence by looking at how much other people interact with each other.
I think the best measure of power in the network of the three which are introduced by the video is the second way.The more times a person's information is propagated,the more important he is. The reason why I think like so is that if many people would like to propagate a piece of information, it means that the message is very important. Along the way, the person sending these messages must be a valuable person. This is the man having the greatest power.
As far as I'm concerned,the people who has the most connection with others is often responsible to communicate the message of the leadership to others.This situation is like in a large company the boss probably just convey his idea to his secretary，who will contact other people.So that using the first way to measure power in the network only could find the man who is the boss' assistant or notifier of messages.
And the third way is to know one's interaction with others,which is showed by the punctuation“@”in social network. I consider that the people has many interactions so he is very friendly and kind. People get used to share something important or interesting to their friends,and someone who has good relationships with others is qualified to act as an interactive role with others. In this case, this kind of people is very popular but not important. We know that a real boss would not get too close to others. Therefore, the third one is not the most powerful.
I really get a different answer when I analysed the content of the messages, rather than the structure of the network. According to previous analysis, is the valuable person. However, if we turn to pay attention to message content, maybe Dan is the most powerful guy. In his messages, he said he had come back to work again and he replied to inform Fred of the meeting place. So we can infer that he is busy and a kind of serious. And these qualifications are necessary for a leader. At the same time, Dan also reply to Bob's and Kelly's message and joke with them, which probably is a way to show he is approachable.
Another hard envidence is that he asked Henry to work hard. This is the requirement of the leader to subordinate, which won't appear commonly between colleagues. Clare also offered that he updated Dan. This situation is like a subordinate report to the boss. To sum up,Dan is the most vutal person.
These analyses are a good way of measuring power and influence in a social group. They are reasonable and logical. But I do not mean they are perfect. Becuase in my opinion, there are some factors missed by the analyses.
We know that in a large company, everyone has his strengths and advantages. So if this company is doing a project which is what A is good at, A is a temporary leader. So the company is at different stages and the key people are different. The second one we ignored is emotion among people. Two people will certainly have more interactions with each other if they are good friends or a pair of lovers. So if A is B's boyfriend, B is like A's leader sometimes. What's more，another factor is everyone's interest and focused issues. Some people have the same enjoyments and they would have more commen topic. In this case, they have more opportunities to share opinions or talk about Non-work related. Therefore, this factor is neglected, too.
I agree with the third view ——In Social Networks power is all to do with our ability to influence people, and that can be measured by looking at how much we interact with others.，。Just like many celebrities, the reason why so many people pay attention to them is that they have so much power, not because they interact with others more, but in the interpersonal relationship given by PDF, there is no doubt that the people with the most power interact with others most.
Most of them talk about things that have nothing to do with their work, but it's interesting to note that the posts they send are often the ones that get the most replies. It seems that people are very interested in such things. At the same time, I also found that the people who sent the most messages were always mentioned the most. A total of 13 speakers were involved, but only 9 were @ mentioned, and the number of people mentioned was the most interactive with others, so it seems that a person's influence is really related to interaction
Such measurements can only measure a person's influence in one way or another. For example, employers make employees work overtime. In China, few people will refute and comment in person, so that people will interact less with their employers online, and if they send other posts, people will have more interaction. In this way, whether a person has power or not depends on whether the person with power speaks about the topic that people are interested in at the moment of interaction
1. We usually think 3.Like the web celebrities and sina Vs .Their weibos can usually get ten thousand likes and forwarding volume(that’s not high-flown,not at all).
2. Say,if we see the content,the first types ,usually president,prime minister usually hold the true power,so their words and weeds certainly are more powerful.
3. The second types,usually are stars and some stars online,their things seem more interesting,we follow other people,give likes ,raise clicks.We don’t know why we do this.We just follow others and it seems not bad.Also,some stars like to interact with their fans(some make a living by this),that’s similar to the second type.
So the problem is obvious.Because the web is widespread and we usually can’t find the truth,we seems lose the proper understanding.That’s what we miss.
1.As we learned,the web was created to make a thing that can contain the world.If the web hadn't been created,what would our world be?
2.Today,the web use is more universal,do this will cause some problems ,is this circumstance you want to see?
The second one.In my opinion, the widespread dissemination of a person's content by others shows that the person's content affects others, and the power is one person's ability to influence another person. Therefore, the most powerful person is the one who disseminates the best information in the network.
There may be different answers. Because there may be a situation where the person's power is not great, but people are interested in the information he sends, which makes the news spread widely.
I think these methods are good methods, because they can basically judge whether a social group has power and influence without paying attention to the content. But these methods can only be used without considering the content of published information.