IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v113y2017i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2556-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A hybrid clustering approach to identify network positions and roles through social network and multivariate analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yu-Hsin Chang

    (Chaoyang University of Technology)

  • Kuei-Kuei Lai

    (Chaoyang University of Technology)

  • Chien-Yu Lin

    (National Yunlin University of Science and Technology)

  • Fang-Pei Su

    (Chaoyang University of Technology)

  • Ming-Chung Yang

    (National Chin-Yi University of Technology)

Abstract

This study proposes a hybrid clustering approach to identify the positions and roles in a relational network by integrating multivariate and social network analysis. First, an adjacency matrix was constructed based on the graph theory to indicate the relation between the collected data. Next, network analysis was conducted and the statistics of network centrality as clustering variables were computed. After, this study reduced clustering variables using the principal component analysis. These selected principal components were then used as clustering variables for a two-step cluster analysis. Hierarchical cluster analysis was first made to determine the appropriate number of clusters and then K-means clustering was used for dividing actors into k proper positions. In addition, the multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to test the significance between those positions. After, a new adjacency matrix was built upon the rearrangement of k positions. The frequency within and between these positions was computed and the cut-off value was determined to distinguish the difference between these frequencies. Finally, each position was labeled based on its characteristics and the relationships within and between these positions. After the structured approach was established, the litigation-related network of smartphone makers was used as empirical evidence. The results showed that this structured approach can effectively distinguish the position and role of a company in a relational network.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu-Hsin Chang & Kuei-Kuei Lai & Chien-Yu Lin & Fang-Pei Su & Ming-Chung Yang, 2017. "A hybrid clustering approach to identify network positions and roles through social network and multivariate analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1733-1755, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2556-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2556-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2556-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2556-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Helén & Havila, Virpi & Andersen, Poul & Halinen, Aino, 1998. "Position and role-conceptualizing dynamics in business networks," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 167-186, March.
    2. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-151, Spring.
    3. Kim, Hyoungshick & Song, JaeSeung, 2013. "Social network analysis of patent infringement lawsuits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(5), pages 944-955.
    4. Benassi, Mario, 1995. "Governance factors in a network process approach," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 269-281, September.
    5. Choe, Hochull & Lee, Duk Hee & Kim, Hee Dae & Seo, Il Won, 2016. "Structural properties and inter-organizational knowledge flows of patent citation network: The case of organic solar cells," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 361-370.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Patent Attributes on the Value of Discrete and Complex Innovations," Papers 2208.07222, arXiv.org.
    2. Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Bhatt, Priyanka C. & Kumar, Vimal & Chen, Hsueh-Chen & Chang, Yu-Hsin & Su, Fang-Pei, 2021. "Identifying the impact of patent family on the patent trajectory: A case of thin film solar cells technological trajectories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    3. Daim, Tugrul & Lai, Kuei Kuei & Yalcin, Haydar & Alsoubie, Fayez & Kumar, Vimal, 2020. "Forecasting technological positioning through technology knowledge redundancy: Patent citation analysis of IoT, cybersecurity, and Blockchain," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Kuang-Cheng Chai & Yang Yang & Zhiyong Sui & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2020. "Determinants of highly-cited green patents: The perspective of network characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-13, October.
    5. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Jong-Seon & Kim, Nami & Bae, Zong-Tae, 2019. "The effects of patent litigation involving NPEs on firms’ patent strategies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    2. Way-Ren Huang & Chia-Jen Hsieh & Ke-Chiun Chang & Yen-Jo Kiang & Chien-Chung Yuan & Woei-Chyn Chu, 2017. "Network characteristics and patent value—Evidence from the Light-Emitting Diode industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Haoyang Song & Jianhua Hou & Yang Zhang, 2022. "Patent protection: does it promote or inhibit the patented technological knowledge diffusion?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2351-2379, May.
    4. Lee, Pei-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2014. "How to forecast cross-border patent infringement? — The case of U.S. international trade," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 125-131.
    5. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    6. Dierker, Daniel A. & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2002. "The Butcher The Baker The Pharmaceutical Maker: Why The Agricultural Biotech Industry May Differ From The General Biotech Industry," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19728, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation:Causal Evidence from the Courts," IIR Working Paper 13-16, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    8. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 11688, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Dietmar Harhoff & Georg von Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner, 2016. "Conflict Resolution, Public Goods, and Patent Thickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 704-721, March.
    11. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2009. "Using neural network to analyze the influence of the patent performance upon the market value of the US pharmaceutical companies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 637-655, September.
    12. Stefan Wagner, 2008. "Business Method Patents In Europe And Their Strategic Use—Evidence From Franking Device Manufacturers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 173-194.
    13. Ponce, Carlos J., 2011. "Knowledge disclosure as intellectual property rights protection," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 418-434.
    14. Su, Hsin-Ning, 2017. "Collaborative and Legal Dynamics of International R&D- Evolving Patterns in East Asia," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 217-227.
    15. Linda R. Cohen & Jun Ishii, 2005. "Competition, Innovation and Racing for Priority at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office," Working Papers 050604, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    16. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2020. "Regional patterns of unrelated technological diversification: the role of academic inventors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 202001, University of Turin.
    17. Graham, Stuart J.H. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2014. "Separating patent wheat from chaff: Would the US benefit from adopting patent post-grant review?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1649-1659.
    18. Schwartz, Eduardo S., 2002. "Patents and R& D as Real Options," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt86b1n43k, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    19. Juranek, Steffen & Otneim, Håkon, 2021. "Using machine learning to predict patent lawsuits," Discussion Papers 2021/6, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    20. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2556-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.