executive summary
DESCRIPTION
Working on Walls (WoW) – an NSERC CREATE Training Program University of B ritish Columbia Vancouver, Canada Social Network Analysis December 2012 By C. Owen Lo & Arwa Alkhalaf. Executive Summary. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Notes
1
Working on Walls (WoW) – an NSERC CREATE Training Program
University of British ColumbiaVancouver, Canada
Social Network AnalysisDecember 2012
By C. Owen Lo & Arwa Alkhalaf
Notes
2
Executive SummaryOverall Network Complexity Development
• The response rate over the course of the 2012 surveys was 96% (A survey was sent in September 2012 and 62% of the Trainees completed the survey; however due to some technical glitches, the data was not analyzable, so the survey was re-distributed in December 2012. Due to low response rate the December 2012 survey was re-sent in February 2012). All non-sabbatical WoW members responded to the survey except on PI.
• The overall WoW social network is fairly active. Among all survey respondents (n=23), a total number of 311 outgoing ties were indicated. On average, each survey participant had 13.1 outgoing ties (the range of actual outgoing ties numbered from 4 - 23).
• More people outside of the WoW context were indicated in this final survey – a difference from previous years. In total 17 participants (including 5 PIs, 3 PDFs, and 9 Trainees) listed 56 ties linked to 42 external individuals as part of their academic professional networks. As part of their professional (non-academic) networks, 13 ties linked to 12 individuals were indicated by 5 Trainees (including 3 PIs, 1 PDF, and 1 Trainee).
• The increase in external connections could be attributed to the fact that there was an international symposium organized by this project group in 2011. The connections developed, or were increased by hosting international students and scholars.
• Since many of the Trainees took part in organizing and participating in the 2011 WoW symposium, many of the external ties made then continued and were mentioned in this survey (e.g., Y. Watanabe mentioned 5 external ties to the Nara Institute of Science and Technology (NAIST) in Japan).
• There were four WoW workshops to discuss career options where new connections may have been developed.
Research-Related Supervision & Mentoring
• All of the Trainees in the survey (n=13) consulted with their designated supervisors during the time period. Seventy percent of these Trainees also indicated that they consulted with their designated co-supervisors. PDFs who participated in this survey only indicated consultation with their designated supervisors.
• Overall, WOW Trainees indicated at least two colleagues with whom they had contact for research-related issues. The average number of out-going consultation ties for the survey respondents was 5.3.
• Although the sample size was too small for a statistical test, the number of connections a Trainee has seems to correlate to a Trainee’s seniority (see Appendix E).
NotesQuestion 1: Which of the following Trainees have you had connections with in the past 6 months?
3
Overall Network – A General LookDensity: 0.59, # of Ties: 311
Reciprocity = 0.56All nodes can reach another with a path shorter than two steps
This map displays the general social interactions among Trainees. In total, 311 ties were indicated by 23 WoW members (including a program manager) and 56% of these ties were indicated as reciprocal.
The network as a whole was rather coherent with a density value of 59%.
While this social map displays the internal interactions, external connections were determined by asking two other questions. In total, 42 people were identified by the Trainees as part of their academic professional network (see Appendix A) while 13 people were identified by the Trainees as part of their non-academic professional network (see Appendix B).
P = PID = PDFT = TraineeM= ManagerBlue lines = Reciprocal lines
Notes
4
Overall Network – DensityDensity: 0.57, # of Ties: 274
PIs: 0.81 PDFs: 0.67 Trainees: 0.62Reciprocity: 0.55
PIs: 0.54 PDFs: 0.50 Trainees: 0.67
The existing ties account for 57% (# = 274) of the possible ties within this network. Thirty-eight percent of these existing ties are reciprocal.
As outlined, members with similar academic ranks (PIs, PDFs, Trainees) tend to have stronger affiliations to each other.
Note, the manager was removed from this map in order to better demonstrate the interaction between Researchers.
The following table demonstrates the inter- and intra-group (read as row to column) densities.
Density Tr PDF PI
Tr .62 .80 .55
PDF .31 .67 .33
PI .46 .50 .81
Question 1: Which of the following Trainees have you had connections with in the past 6 months?
NotesQuestion 1: Which of the following Trainees have you had connections with in the past 6 months?
5
Overall Network – In-degreeRange: 4-20, Average: 12.9, SD: 3.76PIs: 13.3 PDFs: 15.7 Trainees: 12.1
Q1 In-degree table
The size of a node demonstrates the number of incoming ties that a Trainee indicated (the lareger the node, the more incoming ties.)
M. Schuetz had the highest value among all Trainees although he did not participate in the December 2012 survey. PDFs, as a group, had the highest average network.
The table below illustrates the number of Trainee’s incoming ties.
D3 20 T5 13P1 19 T9 13P2 17 T7 12T8 17 T2 12D2 16 D4 11P6 15 T3 11P3 14 T12 10T1 14 T13 9T6 14 P4 8T11 14 P5 7T10 14 T14 4P8 13
NotesQuestion 1: Which of the following Trainees have you had connections with in the past 6 months?
6
Overall Network – Out-DegreeRange: 4-22 Average: 13.1 SD: 5.63
PIs: 13.3 PDFs: 8 Trainees: 14.2
The size of a node displays the number of outgoing ties that a Trainee indicated.
B. Ellis (Project Leader) had the highest value in the network. Trainees as a group, had the highest average.
The table below illustrates the number of Trainee’s outgoing ties.
Q1 Out-degree table
P1 22 T6 14T5 21 P6 13
T12 20 T11 10T3 20 T10 10T9 20 P5 9T2 18 T7 9T1 16 P4 7P3 15 D4 6T8 15 T14 6P2 14 T13 5D3 14 D2 4
NotesQuestion 2: Whom do you ask for help when you have a challenging problem and/or an innovative idea in your research?
Consultation Network – Density & ReciprocityDensity: 0.19, # of Ties: 94
PIs: .47, PDFs: 0.33, Trainees: 0.08Reciprocity: 0.32
PIs: 0.48, PDFs: 0.27, Trainees: 0.31
7
Tr PDF PI
Tr .08 .44 .25PDF .05 .33 .19
PI .12 .39 .47
94 ties were indicated by 22 respondents (exclude the project manager). The 13 Trainees who participated in this survey indicated 23 outgoing ties with the PIs and 17 outgoing ties with the PDFs. On average, a Trainee reported 3.4 outgoing ties to the PIs and PDFs.
The table below indicates that when PIs encounter problems, they most likely solicited information from other PIs and PDFs; PDFs mostly likely would go to other PDFs; whereas Trainees approached the PDFs.
Q2 density table
Note: Blue lines are reciprocal lines
Notes
8
The size of a node indicates the number of incoming ties a Trainee received in regards to obtaining help with challenging problems.
PDFs as a group had the highest average (8.7 ties) of this measure. In the map, Trainees with more seniority tended to have more incoming ties.
Consultation Network – In DegreeRange: 0 – 11, Average: 4.1, SD: 3.58
PIs: 6.3 PDFs: 8.7 Trainees: 1.8
Q2 In Degree table
Note: Blue lines are reciprocal lines
Question 2: Whom do you ask for help when you have a challenging problem and/or an innovative idea in your research?
D3 11 T6 3P2 10 P4 2P6 9 T1 2D2 9 T13 2P1 8 T2 2P8 8 T3 1D4 6 T14 0T5 6 T7 0P3 4 T12 0T8 4 T11 0T9 4 T10 0
P5 3
Notes
9
The size of a node indicates the number of outgoing ties a Trainee indicated when asked to whom they consulted with challenging problems within the WoW context.
Consultation Network– Out-Degree (internal)Range: 1-9, Average: 4.3, SD: 2.59
PIs: 5.5 PDFs: 2.7 Trainees: 4.1
Q2 Out-degree table (within WoW)
Note: Blue lines are reciprocal lines
Question 2: Whom do you ask for help when you have a challenging problem and/or an innovative idea in your research?
T6 9 T12 4P2 8 P5 3P1 8 P3 3T9 8 D2 2T3 7 T7 2P6 6 T8 2T5 6 T11 2P4 5 T10 2D3 5 D4 1T1 5 T14 1
T13 4 T2 1
Notes
10
The size of a node indicates the number of outgoing ties a Trainee indicated in regard to consulting challenging problems.
Appendix C gives more detailed information on the triangle-shaped nodes (non-Trainees) in the map.
In Appendix D, the nodes are coloured according to the primary lab in which a Trainee works.
Consultation Network – Out-degree (all)Range: 1 – 13, Average: 5.3, SD: 3.17
PIs: 6.3 PDFs: 3.7 Trainees: 5.2
Q2 Out-degree table (with others)
Note: Blue lines are reciprocal lines
Question 2: Whom do you ask for help when you have a challenging problem and/or an innovative idea in your research?
T9 13 T13 5T6 11 T12 5P1 9 P3 3P2 8 D4 3T3 8 T14 3P6 7 T7 3T5 7 D2 2P5 6 T8 2D3 6 T11 2P4 5 T10 2T1 5 T2 1
Notes
11
When asked to whom they made connections with from outside of the WoW group for professional academic issues, 56 ties to 42 people were named by 17 Trainees.
UPSC = Umea Plant Science Centre, Umea, Sweden
NAIST = Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Nara, Japan
MPI = Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics
MSL = Michael Smith Laboratories, UBC, BC
UBC = University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
MRU = Mount Royal University, Calgary, Alberta
IBMP CNRS = Biologie Moléculaire des Plantes, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Strasbourg, France
UofT = University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
UVIC = University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada
NUI = National University of Ireland, Galway
UC = University of CaliforniaCCRC = Complex Carbohydrate
Research Center, Athens, Georgia
Appendix A
Information on the professional network (academic) outside of the WoW context
Name Position NotesBjorn Sundberg Professor UPSC, Sweden
Taku Demura Professor NAIST, Japan
Kerstin Müller
John Page Uni. of Calgary
Staffan Persson MPI, Germany
Alexandra Tauzin PDF MSL, UBC
Olivier Hamant Professor U of Lyon, France
Mellissa Roach UBC PDF
Thomas Grigliatti Professor UBC
Yoshito Ogawa Doctoral Student NAIST, Japan
Jane Parker MPI, Germany
Arata Yoneda Assistant Professor NAIST, Japan
Qingning Zeng previous PhD in the lab
Faride Unda PDF, UBC
Stefan Jansson Professor Umea, Sweden
Rosie Redfield Professor UBC
Michael Friedmann Lab Manager Douglas Lab, UBC
Dr. David Bird Professor MRU, CalgaryDaniele Werck-Reichhart Research Director IBMP, StrasbourgPatrick von Aderkaas Professor UVic
Barbara Hawkins Professor UVic
Name Position NotesChris Somerville UC Berkeley
David P. Latorre Grad Student Uni. of Alberta
Yoshimi Nakano PDF NAIST, Japan
Zander Myburg Professor Uni. of Pretoria, SA
Anna Pielach PDF Galway, NUIEliana Gonzales-Vigil PDF, UBC
Lise Jouanin Versaille, INRA
Hitoshi Endo Doctoral Student NAIST, Japan
Debra Mohnen ProfessorCCRC, Uni. of Georgia
Bo Xu PDF NAIST, Japan
Hannele Tuominen Professor UPSC, Sweden
Diyana Rejab Doctoral Student NAIST, Japan
Daniel Matton Professor Uni. of Montreal
Natasha Worden Doctoral Student UC Davis
Keiko Yoshioka Professor
Marcus Samuel Professor Uni. of Calgary
Ralf Reski Professor Freiburg, Germany
Lukas Schreiber Professor Bonn, Germany
Peter Constabel Professor UVic
Nicholas Provart Professor UofT
Notes
12
Appendix B
When asked to whom they made connections in the non-academic professional network outside of the WoW group, 12 people were named by 5 Trainees (research fellows only). Of note, the Program Manager named 8 other people to her non-academic professional network (not included in the table).
Information on the professional network (non-academic) outside of the WoW context
Name Position Notes
Ellie Griffith Program manager Genome BC
Ashleen Shado Research program manager Genome BC
Meilin Yi Zink Green house manager
Kris Palama Technical supportNew England Biolabs, Career Choices Workshop
Christopher Roach Grad student UBC
Min Xia Grad student UBC
Lindsay Grad student UBC
Vicky Earl Graphic designer UBC media group
Jessica Page Research Accounting UVic
Sean Myles Professor
Lead Organizer - Canadian Plant Genomics Workshop 2013, Halifax
Alison Dendoff Coordinator Genome BC
Sandy Blight Research Accounting Univ. of Victoria
Notes
13
Appendix C
The table lists people with whom Trainees indicated they contacted for help with a challenging problem and/or an innovative idea in their research. 22 outgoing ties which connected to 18 non-Trainees were indicated by 13 WoW members.
UBC = University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
FAFU = Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou City, Japan
NAIST = Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Nara, Japan
UofT = University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
IBMP CNRS = Biologie Moléculaire des Plantes, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Strasbourg, France
Information on ‘others’ for Q2
Name Position NotesDr. Bjorn Sundberg Professor UPSC
Heather McFarlane Doctoral student UBC
Dr. Chris Ambrose Research Associate UBC
Dr. Alexandra Tauzin PDF UBC
Dr. Sylwia Wajos PDF Wasteneys lab, UBC
Dr. Minsheng You Professor FAFU, China
Dr. Arata Yoneda Assistant professor NAIST
Yuan Ruan Doctoral student Wasteneys lab, UBC
Dr. Yoshimi Nakano PDF NAIST
Dr. Taku Demura Professor NAIST
Hitoshi Endo Doctoral student NAIST
Dr. Wnzislawa Ckurshumova PDF UofT
Dr. Peter Constabel Professor UVic
Dr. Patrick von Aderkaas Professor UVic
Dr. Barbara Hawkins Professor UVic
Dr. Kevin Hodgson Microscopy technician UBC
Dr. Daniele Werck Director of a research group IBMP CNRS Strasbourg, France
Dr. Hugues Renault Professor IBMP CNRS Strasbourg, France
Notes
14
Appendix E
Ego network – P1
General network Consultation network
Notes
15
Appendix E
Ego network – P2
General network Consultation network
Notes
1616
Appendix E
Ego network – P3
General network Consultation network
Notes
1717
Appendix E
Ego network – P4
General network Consultation network
Notes
1818
Appendix E
Ego network – P5
General network Consultation network
Notes
1919
Appendix E
Ego network – P6
General network Consultation network
Notes
2020
Appendix E
Ego network – D2
General network Consultation network
Notes
2121
Appendix E
Ego network – D3
General network Consultation network
Notes
2222
Appendix E
Ego network – D4
General network Consultation network
Notes
2323
Appendix E
Ego network – T1
General network Consultation network
Notes
2424
Appendix E
Ego network – T2
General network Consultation network
Notes
2525
Appendix E
Ego network – T3
General network Consultation network
Notes
2626
Appendix E
Ego network – T5
General network Consultation network
Notes
2727
Appendix E
Ego network – T6
General network Consultation network
Notes
2828
Appendix E
Ego network – T7
General network Consultation network
Notes
2929
Appendix E
Ego network – T8
General network Consultation network
Notes
3030
Appendix E
Ego network – T9
General network Consultation network
Notes
3131
Appendix E
Ego network – T10
General network Consultation network
Notes
3232
Appendix E
Ego network – T11
General network Consultation network
Notes
3333
Appendix E
Ego network – T12
General network Consultation network
Notes
3434
Appendix E
Ego network – T13
General network Consultation network
Notes
3535
Appendix E
Ego network – T14
General network Consultation network