Comparing Two Methods for Estimating Network Size

Partner naming and forgetting: Recall of network members

“…Psychologists of survey response as well as network researchers have identified several ways an informant may produce a global estimate of network size. First, the estimate may be produced by implicit enumeration (Blair & Burton 1987;Burt 1987;McCarty et al 2001;Sudman & Schwarz 1996;Tourangeau et al 2000). In this process, the informant mentally enumerates the alters and reports the count.…”

Two interpretations of reports of knowledge of subpopulation sizes

“…Jewish, Baptist, etc.). Details of the survey sources and methodology are given in McCarty et al (2001); note in particular that the clergy sample, purchased through a nationally known sampling service, represented the wide variety of clergy roughly proportional to their representation in the population.…”

“…Suppose that the probability that a respondent knows c people is P(c); the work cited gives our current estimates for the distribution of P(c). We assume that each member of the subpopulation is equally likely to be a member of the respondent's network, with probability p = e/t (the cited papers, and McCarty et al, 2001, discuss the potential shortcomings of this assumption, most of which are overcome with a sufficiently representative sample). Then the mean number of people in a subpopulation known to a respondent is given bym…”

Total and Partial Prevalence of Cancer Across Kerman Province, Iran, in 2014, Using an Adapted Generalized Network Scale-Up Method

“…The estimation of the personal network size was conducted using summation method (McCarty et al, 2001), through which the reported number counted by the respondent's relatives, divided by relation, is summed and its average among all the respondents is calculated and considered as C estimate. Number of reported living patients was counted out, divided by sex and age group, for prevalent cancers, viz breast, colorectal, prostate, gastric, and hematopoietic cancers.…”