Sex differences in social networks
31
Table 3
Social Network Stability between Time 1 and 2
|
Boys |
Girls |
Total | |
|
Cores | |||
|
Stable 100% |
0% |
38% |
23% |
|
Count |
0 |
5 |
5 |
|
Stable >50%* |
89% |
77% |
82% |
|
Count |
8 |
10 |
18 |
|
Unstable <50% |
11% |
23% |
18% |
|
Count |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
Total |
41% |
59% |
100% |
|
Count |
9 |
13 |
22 |
|
Groups | |||
|
Stable 100% |
0% |
24% |
17% |
|
Count |
0 |
5 |
5 |
|
Stable >50%* |
100% |
67% |
76% |
|
Count |
8 |
14 |
22 |
|
Unstable <50% |
0% |
33% |
24% |
|
Count |
0 |
7 |
7 |
|
Total |
28% |
72% |
100% |
|
Count |
8 |
21 |
29 |
Note. *Figures include social networks that were 100% stable.
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. Multifunctionality of Agriculture: An Inquiry Into the Complementarity Between Landscape Preservation and Food Security
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Wounds and reinscriptions: schools, sexualities and performative subjects
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent