Magnitude of the problemWho knows your HIV status? What HIV + patients and their network members know about each other☆
References (24)
- et al.
Comparing four different methods for measuring personal social networks
Social Networks
(1990) - et al.
A social network approach to corroborating the number of AIDS/HIV + victims in the US
Social Networks
(1995) - et al.
Estimating the size of personal networks
Social Networks
(1990) - et al.
Knowledge and attitudes about AIDS among corporate and public service employees
American Journal of Public Health
(1992) - et al.
Estimating the size of an average personal network and of an event subpopulation
- et al.
Estimating the size of an average personal network and of an event subpopulation: some empirical results
Social Science Research
(1991) - et al.
Condemnation of homosexuality in the black community: A gender-specific phenomenon?
Archives of Sexual Behavior
(1991) - et al.
A procedure for surveying personal networks
- et al.
Estimating acquaintanceship volume
National health interview survey data on adult knowledge of AIDS in the United States
Public Health Reports
A social network approach to estimating seroprevalence in the United States
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Cited by (50)
You said, they said: A framework on informant accuracy with application to studying self-reports and peer-reports
2022, Social NetworksCitation Excerpt :To note, there are several potential pitfalls of using informant reports as well. First, informants may lack of knowledge about alters’ behaviors because the behaviors are not observable to them or because alters do not want to reveal their behaviors to informants (Bernard et al., 1984; Cowan, 2014; Shelley et al., 1995; Small, 2017). In addition, informants may not be willing to report on others, especially if the reported behavior is sensitive.
Combining the randomized response technique and the network scale-up method to estimate the female sex worker population size: an exploratory study
2018, Public HealthCitation Excerpt :To apply this method, two assumptions should be met: (1) every member of the high-risk population was given the chance to participate in the program and to respond to the survey; and (2) participating in the program is independent of being a respondent to the survey.1,2,12,14 NSUM was proposed by Bernard, Killworth, Johnsen, and Robinson in 1991,15 based on the basic principle of the personal network structure of the general population reflecting the social network structure in a given region.16–22 Initially, NSUM is conducted in two steps.
“It could turn ugly”: Selective disclosure of attitudes in political discussion networks
2018, Social NetworksCitation Excerpt :The systemic withdrawal from conversation to avoid disagreement provides a biased experience of the overall social network, and, as we will discuss in the conclusion, it may in turn also affect dynamics of selection and interpersonal influence in ways that have not yet been fully considered. The little empirical work on selective disclosure of personal characteristics largely involves stigmatized health secrets–pregnancy loss (Cowan, 2014; Lee, 1969) and HIV status (Shelley et al., 1995). While political opinions may not have a high degree of stigma associated with them, avoiding the topic altogether or selectively disclosing and withholding these opinions, can create the same kind of information gap that similar behavior with “weightier” secrets may (Cowan, 2014) and can create perceived segregation (DiPrete et al., 2011).
Validation of tie corroboration and reported alter characteristics among a sample of young men who have sex with men
2017, Social NetworksCitation Excerpt :The quality of reporting on these factors ranges, and is particularly reliant on the type of information collected. For instance, “asymmetric information,” or alter characteristics that are rarely known by the ego, such as HIV status, are likely to be less accurate than age or race (Shelley et al., 1995). Within egocentric networks, there are both direct and indirect ties between individuals.
- ☆
This work was conducted under NSF grant No. SBR-9213615. Much of the analysis took place with the welcome hospitality of the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida, which also provided computing support. We are also indebted to Georgia State University for providing office space for some of the interviews. In addition, we would like to thank Howard Kress and Craig Lindsey for assisting with some of the data collection. Most of all, we are extremely grateful for the time, energy and openness of all the HIV-positive individuals who participated in these interviews.