Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Interdisciplinary Matchmaking: Choosing Collaborators by Skill, Acquaintance and Trust

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Computational Social Network Analysis

Part of the book series: Computer Communications and Networks ((CCN))

  • 3033 Accesses

Abstract

Social networks are commonly used to enhance recommender systems. Most of such systems recommend a single resource or a person. However, complex problems or projects usually require a team of experts that must work together on a solution. Team recommendation is much more challenging, mostly because of the complex interpersonal relations between members. This chapter presents fundamental concepts on how to score a team based on members’ social context and their suitability for a particular project. We represent the social context of an individual as a three-dimensional social network (3DSN) composed of a knowledge dimension expressing skills, a trust dimension and an acquaintance dimension. Dimensions of a 3DSN are used to mathematically formalize the criteria for prediction of the team’s performance. We use these criteria to formulate the team recommendation problem as a multi-criteria optimization problem. We demonstrate our approach on empirical data crawled from two web2.0 sites: onephoto.net and a social networking site. We construct 3DSNs and analyze properties of team’s performance criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdul-Rahman A, Hailes S (2000) Supporting trust in virtual communities. In: System sciences, 2000. Proceedings of the 33rd annual Hawaii international conference in 2000

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aral S, Van Alstyne MW (2008) Networks, information & social capital (formerly titled ’network structure & information advantage). SSRN eLibrary

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beauchamp M (1965) An improved index of centrality. Behav Sci 10:161–163

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bonacich P (1972) Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. J Math Sociol 2:113–120

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bonacich P, Lloyd P (2004) Calculating status wih negative relations. Soc Networks 26:331–338

    Google Scholar 

  6. Borgatti S, Everett M (1996) Models of core/periphery structures. In: Sunbelt international social networks conference, Charleston, SC

    Google Scholar 

  7. Borgatti SP (2004) Social network measures of social capital. A methodological perspective. PDF via WWW

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bourdieu P, Wacquant LJ (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bourdieu P, Passeron JC (1977) Reproduction in education, society, culture. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  10. Burt RS (1983) Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp 176–194

    Google Scholar 

  11. Burt RS (1992) Structural holes. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Burt RS (2001) Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In: Lin N, Cook K, Burt RS (eds) Social capital. Theory and research, chap. 2, Aldine Transaction, New York, pp 31–56

    Google Scholar 

  13. Coleman J (1990) Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Contractor N, Monge P (2002) Managing knowledge networks. Manage Commun Quart 16:249–258

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cummings J (2004) Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Manage Sci 50:352–364

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cummings J, Cross R (2003) Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Soc Networks 25:197–210

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dalkir K (2005) Knowledge management in theory and practice. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  18. Davis S, Botkin J (1998) The coming of knowledge-based business. In: Neef D (ed) The knowledge economy. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  19. Deutsch M (1973) The resolution of conflict. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dunn W, Ginnsberg A (1986) A sociogonitive network approach to organizational analysis. Hum Relat 40:955–976

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ehrlich K, Lin C, Griffiths-Fisher V (2007) Searching for experts in the enterprise: Combining text and social network analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on conference on supporting group work. ACM, pp 117–126

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eisenberg E, Monge P (1987) Handbook of organizational communication, chap. Emergence communication networks. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp 304–342

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fiol C (1989) A semantic analysis of corporate language: Organizational boudaries and joint venturing. Admin Sci Quart 34:277–303

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fleming L, Mingo S, Chen D (2007) Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity & creative success. Admin Sci Quart 52:443–475

    Google Scholar 

  25. Freeman LC (1977) A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40:35–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fukuyama F (1996) Trust: The social virtus and the creation of prosperity. Free Press, Pigden, NY

    Google Scholar 

  27. Genesereth M, Fikes R, et al (1992) Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual

    Google Scholar 

  28. Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 78:1360–80

    Google Scholar 

  29. Gruber T (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquis 5(2):199–220

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gruber T (2007) Ontology of folksonomy: A mash-up of apples and oranges. Int J Semantic Web Info Syst 3(2)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hansen M (1999) The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Admin Sci Quart 44:82–111

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hansen M (2002) Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organ Sci 13:232–248

    Google Scholar 

  33. Harary F (1969) Graph theory. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  34. Johnson HG (1960) The political economy of opulence. Can J Econ Polit Sci 26:552–564

    Google Scholar 

  35. Jones G, George J (1998) The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for co-operation and teamwork. Acad Manage Rev 23(3):531–546

    Google Scholar 

  36. Josang A, Keser C, Dimitrakos T (2005) Can we manage trust? In: Trust Management (iTrust 2005), LNCS, vol 3477. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kamvar S, Schlosser M, Garcia-Molina H (2003) The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in p2p networks. In: WWW2003. ACM, pp 20–24

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kautz H, Selman B, Shah M (1997) Referral Web: Combining social networks and collaborative filtering. Commun ACM 40(3):63–65

    Google Scholar 

  39. Keim T (2007) Extending the applicability of recommender systems: A multilayer framework for matching human resources. In: Proceedings of the 40th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  40. Klimecki R, Lassleben H () What causes organizations to learn? In: Third international conference on organizational learning, 6–8th June 1999, Lancaster University, UK

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lin N (2001) Building a network theory of social capital. In: Lin N, Cook K, Burt RS (eds) Social capital. Theory and research, chap. 1, Aldine Transaction, pp 3–29

    Google Scholar 

  42. Malinowski J, Weitzel T, Keim T (2008) Decision support for team staffing: An automated relational recommendation approach. Decis Support Syst 45(3):429–447 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.05.005

    Google Scholar 

  43. Marsden P (1988) Homogeneity in confiding relations. Soc Networks 10:57–76

    Google Scholar 

  44. Marsh SP (1994) Formalising trust as a computational concept. PhD thesis, University of Stirling

    Google Scholar 

  45. Marx K (1995) In: McLellan D (ed) Capital: A new abridgement. Oxfod University Press

    Google Scholar 

  46. McAllister D (1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad Manage J 38:24–59

    Google Scholar 

  47. McDonald D, Ackerman M (2000) Expertise recommender: A flexible recommendation system and architecture. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work. ACM, pp 231–240

    Google Scholar 

  48. Monge P, Contractor N (2003) Theories of communication networks. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  49. Newman M, Barabasi A, Watts D (2006) The structure and dynamics of networks. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge-creating company: How Japanesee companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxfod University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  51. Putnam R (2000) Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster

    Google Scholar 

  52. Putnam R (2003) Better together: Restoring the American community. Simon & Schuster

    Google Scholar 

  53. Reagans R, McEvily B (2003) Network structure & knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion & range. Admin Sci Quart 48:240–267

    Google Scholar 

  54. Richardson M, Agrawal R, Domingos P (2003) Trust management for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the second international semantic web conference, pp 351–368

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rodan S, Galunic D () More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance & innovativeness. Strategic Manage J 25:541–562

    Google Scholar 

  56. Schultz TW (1961) Investment in human capital. Am Econ Rev LI(1):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  57. Shami N, Ehrlich K, Millen D (2008) Pick me!: link selection in expertise search results. In: Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM

    Google Scholar 

  58. Sztompka P (1999) Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  59. Sztompka P (2007) Zaufanie. Fundament Spoeczestwa (Trust. A foundation of society). Wydawnictwo Znak

    Google Scholar 

  60. Terveen L, McDonald DW (2005) Social matching: A framework and research agenda. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 12(3):401–434 DOI http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1096737.1096740

    Google Scholar 

  61. Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. Am Sociol Rev 61:674–698

    Google Scholar 

  62. Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Admin Sci Quart 42:35–67

    Google Scholar 

  63. Valente T (1995) Network models of the diffusion of information. Hampton Pres, Cresskill, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wal TV Folksonomy coinage and definition. http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wasserman S, Faust K (1999) Social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  66. Wierzbicki AP (1984) A mathematical basis for satisficing decision making. Math Model 3:391–405

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  67. Wierzbicki AP, Makowski M, Wessels J (2000) Model based decision support methodology with environmental applications. Kluwer, Doordrecht

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  68. Zhou R, Hwang K (2007) Powertrust: A robust and scalable reputation system for trusted peer-to-peer computing. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 18(4):460–473

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project has been supported by research grants no: 69/N-SINGAPUR/ 2007/0 and no: N N516 4307 33 of the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education and by Singapore A-STAR grant no: 072 134 0055.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Applied Social Sciences, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Albert Hupa

  2. School of Computer Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Krzysztof Rzadca & Anwitaman Datta

  3. Polish-Japanese Institute of Information Technology, Warsaw, Poland

    Adam Wierzbicki

Authors
  1. Albert Hupa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krzysztof Rzadca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam Wierzbicki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anwitaman Datta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Albert Hupa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Scientific Network for Innovation &, Machine Intelligence Research Labs (MIR), Auburn, 98071-2259, U.S.A.

    Ajith Abraham

  2. Fac. Computers & Information, Cairo University, Ahmed Zewal Street 5, Giza, 12613, Egypt

    Aboul-Ella Hassanien

  3. Dept. Computer Science, Technical University Ostrava, Tr. 17. Listopadu 15, Ostrava, 708 33, Czech Republic

    Vaclav Sná¿el

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hupa, A., Rzadca, K., Wierzbicki, A., Datta, A. (2010). Interdisciplinary Matchmaking: Choosing Collaborators by Skill, Acquaintance and Trust. In: Abraham, A., Hassanien, AE., Sná¿el, V. (eds) Computational Social Network Analysis. Computer Communications and Networks. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-229-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-229-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-228-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-229-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics