Reproduction of Hierarchy?  A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Reproduction of Hierarchy? A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate

on

  • 3,141 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,141
Views on SlideShare
2,658
Embed Views
483

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0

8 Embeds 483

http://computationallegalstudies.com 459
http://lj-toys.com 12
http://l.lj-toys.com 5
http://gqmodels.blogspot.com 2
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 2
http://collected.info 1
http://www.slideshare.net 1
http://www.linkedin.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Reproduction of Hierarchy?  A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate Reproduction of Hierarchy? A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate Presentation Transcript

  • Reproduction of Hierarchy?A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate Daniel Martin Katz Josh Gubler Jon Zelner Michael Bommarito Eric Provins Eitan Ingall
  • Motivation for Project
  • Motivation for ProjectWhy Do Certain Paradigms, Histories, Ideas Succeed? View slide
  • Motivation for ProjectWhy Do Certain Paradigms, Histories, Ideas Succeed? Most Ideas Do Not Persist .... View slide
  • Motivation for ProjectWhy Do Certain Paradigms, Histories, Ideas Succeed? Most Ideas Do Not Persist .... Function of the ‘Quality’ of the Idea
  • Motivation for ProjectWhy Do Certain Paradigms, Histories, Ideas Succeed? Most Ideas Do Not Persist .... Function of the ‘Quality’ of the Idea Social Factors also Influence the Spread of Ideas
  • Positive Legal Theory
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors Repositories / Distributors of information
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors Repositories / Distributors of information Agents of Socialization
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors Repositories / Distributors of information Agents of Socialization Socialize Future lawyers, Judges & law Professors
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors Repositories / Distributors of information Agents of Socialization Socialize Future lawyers, Judges & law ProfessorsResponsible for Developing Particular Legal Ideas (Brandwein (2007) ; Graber (1991), etc.)
  • Positive Legal TheoryLaw Professors are Important Actors Repositories / Distributors of information Agents of Socialization Socialize Future lawyers, Judges & law ProfessorsResponsible for Developing Particular Legal Ideas (Brandwein (2007) ; Graber (1991), etc.)Law Professor Behavior is a ImportantComponent of Positive Legal Theory
  • Social Network Analysis
  • Social Network AnalysisMethod for Tracking Social Connections, etc.
  • Social Network AnalysisMethod for Tracking Social Connections, etc.Method for Characterizing Diffusion / Info Flow
  • Social Network AnalysisMethod for Tracking Social Connections, etc.Method for Characterizing Diffusion / Info FlowMethod for Ranking Components basedupon Various Graph Based Measures
  • Basic Introduction toSocial Network Analysis
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES Actors
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES Institutions Actors
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES Institutions Actors States/Countries
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES Institutions Firms Actors States/Countries
  • Terminology & ExamplesNODES Institutions Firms Actors Other States/Countries
  • Terminology & Examples
  • Terminology & ExamplesExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network Bill
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network Bill Carrie
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network Bill Carrie David
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network Bill Carrie David Ellen
  • Terminology & Examples AliceExample: Nodes in an actor- based social Network Bill CarrieHow Can We Represent TheRelevant Social Relationships? David Ellen
  • Terminology & Examples AliceArcs Bill CarrieEdges David Ellen
  • Terminology & ExamplesArcs Alice Bill CarrieEdges David Ellen
  • Terminology & ExamplesArcs Carrie Alice BillEdges David Ellen
  • Terminology & Examples DavidCarrie Alice Bill A Full Representation of the Social Network Ellen
  • Terminology & Examples DavidCarrie Alice Bill A Full Representation Ellen of the Social Network (With Node Weighting)
  • Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Cornell University Law School
  • Building A Graph Theoretic RepresentationHarvard Penn Cornell
  • Building A Graph Theoretic RepresentationHarvard Penn Cornell
  • Building A Graph Theoretic RepresentationHarvard Penn Cornell
  • Building A Graph Theoretic RepresentationHarvard Penn Cornell
  • Building the Full Dataset
  • Building the Full Dataset
  • Building the Full Dataset
  • Building the Full Dataset
  • Building the Full Dataset ....
  • Full Data Set ....
  • Full Data Set7,054 Law Professors ! p = {p1, p2, ... p7240} ....
  • Full Data Set7,054 Law Professors ! p = {p1, p2, ... p7240}184 ABA Accredited Institutions n = {n1 , n2, … n184} ....
  • Visualizing a Full Network
  • Visualizing a Full Network
  • Visualizing a Full Network
  • Visualizing a Full Network
  • Visualizing a Full Network
  • Zoomable Visualization Available @http://computationallegalstudies.com/
  • Zoomable Visualization Available @http://computationallegalstudies.com/
  • A Graph-Based Measure of Centrality
  • Hub Score
  • Hub ScoreSimilar to the Google PageRank™ Algorithm Measure who is important? Measure who is important to who is important? Run Analysis Recursively...
  • Hub ScoreSimilar to the Google PageRank™ Algorithm Measure who is important? Measure who is important to who is important? Run Analysis Recursively...Score Each Institution’s Placements byNumber and Quality of Links Normalized Score (0, 1]
  • HubScore Rank 1 US News Peer Assessment 1 Hub Score 1.0000000 Institution Harvard Hub Scores 2 1 0.9048631 Yale 3 5 0.8511497 Michigan 4 4 0.7952253 Columbia 5 5 0.7737389 Chicago 6 8 0.7026757 NYU 7 1 0.6668868 Stanford Hub US News Hub 8 8 0.6607399 Berkeley Score Peer Institution Score Rank Assessment 9 10 0.6457157 Penn 10 10 0.6255498 Georgetown 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 11 5 0.5854464 Virginia 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 12 14 0.5014904 Northwestern 28 28 0.1749897 USC 13 10 0.4138745 Duke 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 14 10 0.4075353 Cornell 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 15 15 0.3977734 Texas 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 16 28 0.3787268 Wisconsin 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 17 19 0.3273598 UCLA 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 18 24 0.2959581 Illinois 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 19 28 0.2919847 Boston University 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 20 28 0.2513371 Minnesota 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 21 24 0.2403289 Iowa 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 22 28 0.2275534 Indiana 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 23 19 0.2235015 George 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 24 16 0.2174677 Washington Vanderbilt 40 47 0.1198901 American 25 41 0.2012442 Florida 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Hub US News Peer Hub InstitutionScore Rank Assessment Score Score 26 24 0.1999686 UC Hastings 27 34 0.1974877 Tulane 28 28 0.1749897 USC 29 35 0.1702638 Ohio State 30 24 0.1586516 Boston College 31 72 0.1543831 Syracuse 32 19 0.1537236 UNC 33 56 0.1525355 Case Western 34 82 0.1511569 Northeastern 35 19 0.1428239 Notre Dame 36 56 0.1286375 Temple 37 82 0.1232289 Rutgers Camden 38 56 0.1227421 Kansas 39 64 0.1213358 Connecticut 40 47 0.1198901 American 41 34 0.1162101 Fordham 42 64 0.1150860 Kentucky 43 106 0.1148082 Howard 44 47 0.1125957 Maryland 45 28 0.1101975 William & Mary 46 56 0.1058079 Colorado 47 19 0.1041129 Emory 48 17 0.1031490 Washington & Lee 49 72 0.1027442 Miami 50 103 0.1006172 SUNY Buffalo
  • Distribution ofSocial Authority
  • Top 20 Institutions (By Raw Placements)1,000 800 600400200 BU IllinoisMinnesota Northwesternexas T Duke UCLA Cornell isconsin W 0 NYU Stanford Berkeley UVA GeorgetownPenn Harvard Yale Michigan Columbia Chicago
  • ! !
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems!
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems!Katz & Stafford 2010
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems!Katz & Stafford 2010
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems Smith 2007!Katz & Stafford 2010
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems Smith 2007!Katz & Stafford 2010
  • Highly Skewed Nature of Legal Systems Smith 2007!Katz & Stafford 2010 Post & Eisen 2000
  • Implications for Rankings
  • Implications for Rankings Rankings only Imply Ordering ( >, =, < )
  • Implications for Rankings Rankings only Imply Ordering ( >, =, < ) End Users tend to Conflate Ranks with Linearized Distances Between Units (Tversky 1977)
  • Implications for Rankings Rankings only Imply Ordering ( >, =, < ) End Users tend to Conflate Ranks with Linearized Distances Between Units (Tversky 1977) Non-Stationary Distances Between Entities Both Trivial and Large Distances Linearity Heuristic Often Works Assuming Linearity Can Prove Misleading
  • Computational Model of Information Diffusion
  • Why Computational Simulation?
  • Why Computational Simulation?History only Provides a Single Model Run
  • Why Computational Simulation?History only Provides a Single Model RunComputational Simulation allows ... Consideration of Alternative “States of the world” Evaluation of Counterfactuals
  • Computational Model of Information Diffusion
  • Computational Model of Information DiffusionWe Apply a simple Disease Model to Consider the Spread of Ideas, etc.
  • Computational Model of Information DiffusionWe Apply a simple Disease Model to Consider the Spread of Ideas, etc.Clear Tradeoff Between Structural Position in the Network and “Idea Infectiousness”
  • A Basic Description of the Model
  • A Basic Description of the ModelConsider a Hypothetical Idea Releasedat a Given Institution
  • A Basic Description of the ModelConsider a Hypothetical Idea Releasedat a Given InstitutionInfectiousness Probability = p
  • A Basic Description of the ModelConsider a Hypothetical Idea Releasedat a Given InstitutionInfectiousness Probability = pInfect neighbors, neighbors-neighbors, etc.
  • A Basic Description of the ModelConsider a Hypothetical Idea Releasedat a Given InstitutionInfectiousness Probability = pInfect neighbors, neighbors-neighbors, etc.Two Forms Diffusion... Direct Socialization Signal Giving to Former Students
  • Channels of Diffusion
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics Legal Socialization / Training
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics Legal Socialization / Training Judicial Decisions, Law Reviews, Other Materials
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics Legal Socialization / Training Judicial Decisions, Law Reviews, Other Materials Academic Conferences, Other Professional Orgs
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics Legal Socialization / Training Judicial Decisions, Law Reviews, Other Materials Academic Conferences, Other Professional Orgs SSRN, Legal Blogosphere, etc.
  • Channels of DiffusionLots of Channels of Information DiffusionAmong Legal Academics Legal Socialization / Training Judicial Decisions, Law Reviews, Other Materials Academic Conferences, Other Professional Orgs SSRN, Legal Blogosphere, etc. Other Channels of Information Dissemination
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • A Sample Run of the Model
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop (Requires Java 5.0 or Higher)
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop (Requires Java 5.0 or Higher)
  • Run a Simulationon Your Desktop (Requires Java 5.0 or Higher)
  • Run a Simulation on Your Desktop (Requires Java 5.0 or Higher)http://computationallegalstudies.com/2009/04/22/the-revolution-will-not-be-televised-but-will-it- come-from-harvard-or-yale-a-network-analysis-of-the-american-law-professoriate-part-iii/
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion Plot
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/Regular Programming Language TypicallyRequired for Full Scale Implementation
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/Regular Programming Language TypicallyRequired for Full Scale ImplementationWe Used Python
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/Regular Programming Language TypicallyRequired for Full Scale ImplementationWe Used Python
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/Regular Programming Language TypicallyRequired for Full Scale ImplementationWe Used Python http://www.python.org/
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion PlotNetlogo is Good for Model Demonstration http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/Regular Programming Language TypicallyRequired for Full Scale ImplementationWe Used Python http://www.python.org/ Object Oriented Programming Language
  • From a Single Run toConsensus Diffusion Plot
  • From a Single Run to Consensus Diffusion PlotRepeated the Diffusion Simulation
  • From a Single Run to Consensus Diffusion PlotRepeated the Diffusion SimulationHundreds of Model Runs Per School
  • From a Single Run to Consensus Diffusion PlotRepeated the Diffusion SimulationHundreds of Model Runs Per SchoolYielded a Consensus Plot for Each School
  • From a Single Run to Consensus Diffusion PlotRepeated the Diffusion SimulationHundreds of Model Runs Per SchoolYielded a Consensus Plot for Each SchoolResults for Five Emblematic Schools Exponential, linear and sub-linear
  • Computational Simulation of Diffusion uponthe Structure of the American Legal Academy !
  • Some PotentialModel Improvements?
  • Some Potential Model Improvements?Differential Host Susceptibility
  • Some Potential Model Improvements?Differential Host SusceptibilityCountervailing Information / Paradigms
  • Some Potential Model Improvements?Differential Host SusceptibilityCountervailing Information / ParadigmsS I R Model Susceptible-Infected-Recovered
  • Directions forFuture Research
  • Directions for Future ResearchLongitudinal Data Hiring/Placement/Laterals Current Collecting Data
  • Directions for Future ResearchLongitudinal Data Hiring/Placement/Laterals Current Collecting DataDatabase Linkage to Articles/Citations Working with Content Providers
  • Directions for Future ResearchLongitudinal Data Hiring/Placement/Laterals Current Collecting DataDatabase Linkage to Articles/Citations Working with Content ProvidersEmpirical Evaluation of Simulation Computational Lingusitics Text Mining, Sentiment Coding
  • Thanks for Support