Data and Measures
Social Network Questions
The data comprise two different networks: a network of seventy-two year 10 secondary school boys from a private, religious, all-male secondary college (mean age = 15.5, standard deviation (SD) = 0.5), and a network of thirty-eight professional footballers (mean age = 22.7, SD = 4.0) from an all-male professional football team (Lusher, 2008). These two studies provide an illustration of how perceived attitudes can be important in different contexts and with different networks.
The schoolboys’ network involved “positive affect” relations, derived from three name generator questions: (1) friends, and/or (2) who you admire, and/or (3) who you would like to be seen with. Nominating any student on any of these relations led to the presence of a tie in the network, the result being a binary, composite tie network. The densities of the three networks were friend = 0.0497, admire = 0.0067, and seen with = 0.0262. Pearson correlations of networks using the Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP) were as follows: friend-seen with = 0.594**; friend- admire = 0.236**; and admire-seen with = 0.182**.
For the football team, we examined “aggression” relations because this sport requires an element of controlled aggression professionally. Participants were asked about their involvement in specific habitual behaviors comprising physical (e.g., “unnecessarily aggressive toward you during training activities”), verbal (e.g. “tease, puts you down”), or social (e.g., “exclude, not socialize with”) aggression. Ties are represented as selfnominations of victimization. For ease of interpretation, we transformed the network such that “aggressors are senders” of aggression ties, whereas “victims are receivers” of ties. Again, a binary and composite aggression network was produced.