↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Violating Social Norms when Choosing Friends: How Rule-Breakers Affect Social Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Violating Social Norms when Choosing Friends: How Rule-Breakers Affect Social Networks
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0026652
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karlo Hock, Nina H. Fefferman

Abstract

Social networks rely on basic rules of conduct to yield functioning societies in both human and animal populations. As individuals follow established rules, their behavioral decisions shape the social network and give it structure. Using dynamic, self-organizing social network models we demonstrate that defying conventions in a social system can affect multiple levels of social and organizational success independently. Such actions primarily affect actors' own positions within the network, but individuals can also affect the overall structure of a network even without immediately affecting themselves or others. These results indicate that defying the established social norms can help individuals to change the properties of a social system via seemingly neutral behaviors, highlighting the power of rule-breaking behavior to transform convention-based societies, even before direct impacts on individuals can be measured.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Malaysia 1 2%
New Zealand 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 51 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 19 33%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 26%
Psychology 6 11%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Environmental Science 4 7%
Computer Science 3 5%
Other 15 26%
Unknown 10 18%