Complex networks, comprising tens to thousands of nodes are ubiquitous in society, ranging from acquaintance networks—which are of interest in sociology— to networks of interactions between companies and financial institutions—which are of interest in economics. A large number of such systems exhibit structural patterns that appear to be universal. One such organizational feature seen in many networks is modularity, where the network is divided into several connected clusters (‘communities’) with the connection density in each cluster being significantly higher than that for the entire network. Modularity can often be also hierarchical, appearing at several different scales. Recent advances in reconstructing networks from empirical data have shown that modularity is ubiquitous. In this article we explore the role of modularity in organizing the collective dynamics of social networks. The lessons of this analysis may have important implications for understanding the process of consensus formation through individuals affecting the opinions of their neighbours via interactions through the links of the social network.
AgarwalA.CorvalanA.JensenJ.RambowO. (2012). Social network analysis of Alice in Wonderland. Proceedings of Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Literature (pp. 88–96).Montreal, Canada: ACL.
2.
AlberichR.Miro-JuliaJ.RosselloF. (2002). Marvel Universe looks almost like a real social network. Retrieved from arXiv preprint cond-mat/0202174.
3.
ArthurW.B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131.
4.
ArthurW.B. (1990). Positive feedbacks in the economy. Scientific American, 262(2), 92–99.
5.
BanerjeeA.ChandrasekharA.G.DufloE.JacksonM.O. (2013). The diffusion of microfinance. Science, 341(6144), 1236498.
6.
BarabasiA.L.AlbertR. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439), 509–512.
LozanoS.ArenasA.SanchezA. (2008). Mesoscopic structure conditions the emergence of cooperation on social networks. PLoS one, 3(4), e1892.
19.
LusseauD.NewmanM.E. (2004). Identifying the role that animals play in their social networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 271(Suppl 6), S477–S481.
20.
Mac CarronP.KennaR. (2012). Universal properties of mythological networks. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 99(2), 28002.
21.
Mac CarronP.KennaR. (2013). Network analysis of the Íslendinga sögur–the Sagas of Icelanders. The European Physical Journal B, 86(10), 1–9.
22.
ManganS.AlonU. (2003). Structure and function of the feed-forward loop network motif. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 100(21), 11980–11985.
23.
MatthewsP.BarrettL. (2005). Small-screen social groups: Soap operas and social networks. Journal of Cultural and Evolutionary Psychology, 3(1), 75–86.
24.
MiloR.Shen-OrrS.ItzkovitzS.KashtanN.ChklovskiiD.AlonU. (2002). Network motifs: Simple building blocks of complex networks. Science, 298(5594), 824–827.
25.
NewmanM.E.GirvanM. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E, 69(2), 026113.
26.
NewmanM.E.J. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 103(23), 8577–8582.
27.
NewmanM.E.J. (2010). Networks: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
OnnelaJ.P.SaramäkiJ.HyvönenJ.SzabóG.LazerD.KaskiK.BarabásiA.L. (2007). Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 104(18), 7332–7336.
RogersE.M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
36.
RosvallM.BergstromC.T. (2007). An information-theoretic framework for resolving community structure in complex networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 104(18), 7327–7331.
37.
Rydberg-CoxJ. (2011). Social networks and the language of Greek tragedy. Journal of the Chicago Colloquium on Digital Humanities and Computer Science, 1(3), 1–11.
38.
SimonH.A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6), 467–482.
39.
SinghR.DasguptaS.SinhaS. (2011). Chimera order in spin systems. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 95(1), 10004.
40.
SinghR.DasguptaS.SinhaS. (2014). Extreme variability in convergence to structural balance in frustrated dynamical systems. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 105(1), 10003.
StillerJ.HudsonM. (2005). Weak links and scene cliques within the small world of Shakespeare. Journal of Cultural and Evolutionary Psychology, 3(1), 57–73.
43.
StillerJ.NettleD.DunbarR.I. (2003). The small world of Shakespeare’s plays. Human Nature, 14(4), 397–408.
44.
WassermanS. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
WattsD.J.StrogatzS.H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.
