Hierarchy in Mixed Relation Networks: Warfare Advantage and Resource Distribution in Simulated World-Systems


Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Journal of Social Structure

International Network for Social Network Analysis

Subject: Social Sciences


eISSN: 1529-1227





Volume / Issue / page

Volume 21 (2020)
Volume 20 (2019)
Volume 19 (2018)
Volume 18 (2017)
Volume 17 (2016)
Volume 16 (2015)
Volume 15 (2014)
Volume 14 (2013)
Volume 13 (2012)
Volume 12 (2011)
Volume 11 (2010)
Volume 10 (2009)
Related articles

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 1 (December 2013) > List of articles

Hierarchy in Mixed Relation Networks: Warfare Advantage and Resource Distribution in Simulated World-Systems

Jacob Apkarian * / Jesse B. Fletcher / Christopher Chase-Dunn / Robert A. Hanneman

Keywords : World-systems, networks, elementary theory, exclusion, demographics, warfare, migration, trade, simulation

Citation Information : Journal of Social Structure. Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages 1-17, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/joss-2019-023

License : (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Published Online: 14-August-2019



Building on world-systems theory, simulation models of 5-line intersocietal networks were generated in an effort to understand systemic power hierarchies. The societal nodes were exclusively connected by three types of interaction: migration, warfare, and unequal trade. These networks can be considered “mixed relation” networks due to the ways in which these types of ties combine positive and negative sanction flows. Insights from elementary theory were employed to understand how exclusion from these different types of ties might influence the resulting power distributions. Additionally, the resource carrying capacity of the nodes was varied by structural position in an effort to differentiate the influence of structural position and individual attributes on location in the hierarchy. It was determined that exclusion from interaction is likely a structural, scale invariant mechanism that helps to determine power distributions above and beyond the inherent attributes of network actors.

Content not available PDF Share



Barro, Robert J. and Xavier Sala-i-Martin (1997). "Technological Diffusion, Convergence, and Growth." Journal of Economic Growth 2: 1-26.


Berryman, Alan (1992). “The Origins and Evolution of Predator-Prey Theory.” Ecology 73, 5:1530-1535.


Bonacich, Phillip (2001). “The Evolution of Exchange Networks.” Journal of Social Structure 2, 5. Available: http://www.cmu.edu/joss/content/articles/volume2/Bonacich.html [July 16, 2013].


Carneiro, Robert L. (1970). “A Theory of the Origin of the State.” Science 169: 733-738.


Chase-Dunn, Christopher (2001). “World-Systems Theorizing.” Pp. 589-612 in Handbook of Sociological Theory, edited by J. H. Turner. New York: Springer.


Chase-Dunn, Christopher and Peter Grimes (1995). "World-Systems Analysis." Annual Review of Sociology 21: 387-417.


Chase-Dunn, Christopher and Thomas D. Hall (1997). Rise and Demise: Comparing World-Systems. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.


Collins, Randall (2010). “A Dynamic Theory of Battle Victory and Defeat.” Cliodynamics. 1: 3-25. 


Cook, K., R. Emerson, M. Gillmore and T. Yamagishi (1983). “The Distribution of Power in Exchange Networks: Theory and Experimental Results.” American Journal of Sociology 89: 275-305.


Cook, K., M. Gillmore and T. Yamagishi (1986). “Power and Line Vulnerability as a Basis for Predicting the Distribution of Power in Exchange Networks.” American Journal of Sociology 92: 445-448.


Fletcher, Jesse B., Jacob Apkarian, Robert A. Hanneman, Hiroko Inoue, Kirk Lawrence and Christopher Chase-Dunn (2011a). “Demographic Regulators in Small-Scale World-Systems.” Structure and Dynamics 5, 1.


Fletcher, Jesse B., Jacob Apkarian, Anthony Roberts, Kirk Lawrence, Christopher Chase-Dunn and Robert A. Hanneman (2011b). “War Games: Simulating Collins’ Theory of Battle Victory.” Cliodynamics 2, 2.


Markovsky, B., D. Willer and T. Patton (1999). “Power Relations in Exchange Networks.” Pp. 87-108 in Network Exchange Theory, edited by D. Willer. Westport, CT: Praeger.


Parsons, Talcott (1982). On Institutions and Social Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


Rosenzweig, Michael (1971). “Paradox of Enrichment: Destabilization of Exploitation Ecosystems in Ecological Time.” Science 171, 3969: 385-387.


Spencer, Herbert and Robert L. Carneiro (1967). The Evolution of Society: Selections from Herbert Spencer's Principles of Sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.


Thébault, Elisa and Colin Fontaine (2010). “Stability of Ecological Communities and the Architecture of Mutualistic and Trophic Networks.” Science 329 (13 August): 853-856.


Turchin, Peter (2003a). Complex Population Dynamics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.


Turchin, Peter (2003b). Historical Dynamics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.


Willer, David (1999). "Network exchange theory: Issues and Directions." Pp. 1-22 in Network Exchange Theory, edited by D. Willer. Westport, CT: Praeger.


Willer, David and Barry Markovsky (1993). "Elementary Theory: Its Development and Research Program." Pp. 323-363 in Theoretical Research Programs: Studies in the Growth of Theory, edited by J. Berger and M. Zelditch Jr. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.