Notes on Edits to Oliver & Myers, Chapter 8

Notes on edits to Oliver & Myers, Chapter 8.

I edited in pencil, which I’m afraid may not always show up, so I’m highlighting in blue pencil on the hard copy, and using blue circles in the PDF copy.

These are notes where I am afraid the edits may be unclear. p. 177. Line 6, sentence ends with “modeling of each.” Line 7, phrase after editing reads: “question of how the process might be reflected” p. 179 corrections to first sentence of new section. In this model, each actor has a probability pk of acting . Aat each time period, the actor acts or does not with probability pk . Thus the number of people who actually act at each time period varies stochastically around the mean NpkN, where N is the number of actors.

Each actor=s pk may change across time as a function of the past actions of themselves or others.

P 179. After corrections: In this model, each actor has a probability pk of acting at each time period. The number of people who actually act at each time period varies stochastically around the mean Npk, where N is the number of actors. Each actor=s pk may change across time as a function of the past actions of themselves or others. p. 180. Insert “frequency” where indicated. p. 181. New figures will be sent to Gwen in spreadsheets. Changes are swapping primary and secondary axes and labeling both axes. No change in size of figure. p. 182 First complete sentence after editing reads: “For this reason, in this chapter we use models employing the assumption that actors respond to the level of prior action.” p. 182 Third sentence reads after editing: “The basic elements of this model are: pt =probability of acting at time t; n= number of actors— a random process determines whether each actor actually acts on a given trial; rk(t)=recent total number of actions across all actors within the past k trials at time t; and k I= the number of trials considered. p. 182. Corrected equation reads: pt= pt-1(1+w1(kn-rt-1)( rt-1)/n) p. 182, 10th line from bottom of page, phrase after correction reads: “The lower panel provides” p. 183. Correction to graphic will be sent directly to Gwen; this involves swapping primary and secondary axes and adding axis label. There are also corrections to figure labels & legends: 1) top panel label is: Diffusion effect: all ties 2) Lower panel legend changes “Total” to “All,” 3) Figure Label is changed to read: “Top panel shows diffusion in a homogeneous group (all have p0=.05) with all ties present. Bottom pane contrasts all ties with no ties for homogeneous and heterogeneous groups (one actor has p0=.4, all others p0=.01). Feedback weight is .005. p. 187. New figure label reads: “Comparison of different patterns of network ties in the diffusion of action for heterogeneous and homogeneous groups.” Also note the change in the legend: Substitute “All” for “Total” p. 188. Please note that “news hole” is a media term, and the editor’s change to “whole news” is nonsensical. I have added quotation marks for the benefit of those who do not recognize that this is a term. p. 189 changes to graphic: 1) label at top changed to “ Effect of media coverage on event diffusion” 2) Figure caption changed to: Media coverage as flat percentage provides communication, which promotes event diffusion. There is little difference between heterogeneous and homogeneous groups. 3) Axis label added: “Number Actions” 4) Better to reorganize the legend labels this way: ----- Heterogeneous, 100% ------Heterogeneous, 50% ------Heterogeneous, 20% ------Homogeneous, 100% ------Homogeneous, 50% ------Homogeneous, 20% p. 190 Changes to figure 8.5 1) Change label at top: “Effect of media coverage on event diffusion” 2) Change caption to read: Comparison of action diffusion when news coverage rate is 100%, 50%, 20%, or a function of number of actors. Homogeneous groups. 3) Add axis label: Number of Actions 4) Change legends ------50% coverage ------100% coverage ------20% coverage ------coverage function of size

Changes to figure 8.6 1) Change legends in both panels, so that the top legend reads “events in news” and the second reads “actual events” 2) Add Y axis labels to both: Number Actions 3) Change figure caption to read: Comparison of actual event series with events reported in the news. Top panel shows a flat 50% coverage rate. Bottom panel shows coverage proportional to the number of actors. Homogeneous groups.

, changes to figure 8.7 1) change legends to read “events in news” and “actual events” 2) add Y axis label: Number events 3) Change caption: Independent issue attention cycle can distort apparent protest cycle. Dashed line is actual events, solid line is events reported in the news.

, figure 8.8. Add Y axis label to all panels: “Opinion”

, line 6: 0,1 is a way to indicate that the entries in the matrix are 0’s or 1’s.

, figure 8.9, changes: 1) top panel label changed to: Convergence of opinion over time 2) top panel, Y axis label: “Opinion” 3) bottom panel, Y axis label: “Average contact probability” 4) Caption after edits: “Network ties are probabilistic and can be increased by contact. Each clique of five actors initially has 50% probability of contact within clique and 5% between cliques. Upper panel shows opinion convergence as actors come into contact. Lower panel shows that the average probability of contact gradually rises across many time periods.

, last sentence of middle paragraph reads: “We cannot provide a detailed analysis of this problem, but we present here one example of it in the empirical data, and show how that kind of phenomenon can be modeled.”

Delete reference to appendix and insert in its place: “often with no prior warning or build-up of action.”

, changes in figure 8.10 1) edit 3rd legend item to read: 3 period average 2) Add Y axis, “Number Actions” 3) Delete –10 from left of X axis 4) Edit caption to read: Hidden organizing against a backdrop of random noise. Random networks.

In bibliography, change title of Oliver & Myers forthcoming to “The Coevolution of Social Movements.”