WashingtonAcademyDormNetworkingSurveyResults

WillHopkinsandNinaNikoliov
Thedevelopmentofgroups,cliques,andfriendshipsinteenagersfromacrossmany
socialcirclesandcategoriesisonethatisseverelyunderresearched.WashingtonAcademys
dormsystemprovidesaperfectpetridishlikescenarioinwhichtostudythisimportantphase
ofhumandevelopment.Locatedinasmall,semiprivatehighschoolindowneastMaine,these
dormscontainapproximately70studentsatanygiventime,youngmenandwomenfromallover
theworld,originatingfromdozensofsocialandculturalmilieus.Whenplacedinclosequarters,
bothphysicallyandsocially,witheachotherinanotherwisefairlyisolatedenvironmentfarfrom
thatwhichtheyareusedto,itprovidespossiblythepurestconditionsunderwhichtostudythe
mechanismsbywhichthemembersofthispopulationconstructtheirinteractionnetworks.
Wedesignedasurvey(acopyofwhichisvisibleatthebottomofthispage)togather
unbiased,confidential,representativedataonthedaytodaysociallivesofstudentsinthedorms.
Atthetimeofdistribution,68studentsfrom15countrieswereresidinginthedorms.Somehad
arrivedatWashingtonAcademysimultaneouslyatthebeginningofthesemester,whileothers
hadnotarriveduntilshortlybeforefillingoutthesurvey.ThesurveywasapprovedbyMr.
Reynolds,printedanddisseminatedviathedormparentspresentineachofthethreedorm
buildings(Talbot,Cates,andLarson).Talbot,alsoknownastheBoysDorm,andLarsonare
thetwoboysonlydormswhileCates,alsoknownastheGirlsDorm,istheonegirlsonly
dorm.Theformswerethencollectedoveraperiodofweeksfollowing,with49outofthe
original68(approximately72%)ofthesurveysbeingreturned.Itshouldbenotedthattwodorm
studentshadseenthesurveybeforeitwassimultaneouslydistributed,onebecausetheywereone

ofthesurveyauthors,andtheotherbecausetheywereaskedtobetatesttheformandcheckits
comprehensibility.
Afterthesurveyswerecollectedanditwasclearthatnofurtherformswouldbereturned,
thedataweretabulatedandanalyzed.Resultswere,formostanalyses,sortedbycountryof
origin.Forreasonsbothofdatareliabilityandconfidentiality,onlycountrieswithareturnrateof
greaterthan50%andwhichhavemorethanonestudentintheWashingtonAcademydorms
werecountedforstatisticsthatinvolveddisplayingindividualcountriesdata.Thefirstquestion
soughtsimplytoanalyzewhetherdormstudentsweremorelikelytointeractprimarilywithother
dormstudents,withstudentswhodidnotliveinthedorms,orwhetherresidentialstatushadlittle
ornoeffectuponinteractionfrequency.

Section1:
Theresultsofthefirstsubstantial,nondemographicquestion(actuallyquestionfour)
werenotentirelyunexpected.Figure1.1showsagraphofpossibleresponsestoquestionfour
versusfrequencyofresponse.Unsurprisingly,noneofthepolledstudentsrespondedthatthey
hadzerototwointeractionswithotherdormstudentsonaregularbasis.Theresponsesclimbed
steadilyfromthreetosix,thenunderwentanunexpecteddropatseven.Thishasnotyetbeen
explained.Theupwardtrendcontinuesateight,andthendropsoff,again,unexpectedly,atnine,
beforerisingbacktoitsprevioustrendlineatten.Thismakessense,asdormstudentsspendat
leasttwelvehoursoutoftheirdayintheactiveorpassivepresenceofalmostexclusivelyother
dormstudents(ie.extracurriculardormonlyfieldtrips,dinners,loungetime,etc.).Figures
1.21.10showthesamedatabrokendownbycountry.

Fig.1.1:Numberofinteractionswithdormstudentsper10interactionswithotherstudents
plottedvs.frequencyofresponse.

Fig1.2:NumberofinteractionsofChinesestudentswithdormstudentsper10interactionswith
otherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =7.947,s=2.438).

Fig1.3:NumberofinteractionsofCzechstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactionswith
otherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =6,s=2).

Fig1.4:NumberofinteractionsofGuatemalanstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactions
withotherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =9,s=1.414).

Fig1.5:NumberofinteractionsofItalianstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactionswith
otherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =5,s=0).

Fig1.6:NumberofinteractionsofJamaicanstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactionswith
otherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =7,s=2.828).

Fig1.7:NumberofinteractionsofRussianstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactionswith
otherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =10,s=0).

Fig1.8:NumberofinteractionsofRwandanstudentswithdormstudentsper10interactions
withotherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =9,s=1.732).

Fig1.9:NumberofinteractionsofAmericandormstudentswithdormstudentsper10
interactionswithotherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =4.333,s=1.155).

Fig1.10:NumberofinteractionsofVietnamesestudentswithdormstudentsper10interactions
withotherstudentsplottedvs.frequencyofresponse( x =9,s=1.414).

The x valuesforeachcountryarechartedbelowinclassesofone.Lowervaluesindicate
agreaterlevelofinteractionwithstudentsoutsideofthedorms,whilehighervaluesaccordingly
indicatelesssuchinteraction.
01

12

23

34

45

56

67

78

89

910

Czech
U.S.A
Republic
(4.333) (6.000)

Jamaica
(7.000)

China
(7.947)

Guatemala
(9.000)

Russia
(10.000)

Italy
(5.000)

Rwanda
(9.000)

Vietnam
(9.000)

Fig.1.11: x valuesforeachcountrysresponsetoquestionfour.Integervalueswereincludedin
thelowerclasswhichincludedtheirvalue,asRussiawouldotherwisehavehadtobegivena
1011classwhichdidnotfitwithinthecriteriaofthegathereddata.

Unsurprisingly,thestudentsmostlikelytointeractfrequentlywithstudentsoutsideofthe
dormsarethosefromtheUnitedStates.Thismayfairlyeasilybeattributedtotherelative
homogeneityofAmericanculture,asidefromsmalllocalfluctuations.AnAmericaninonecity
canparticipateinandunderstandpopularcultureaswellasanAmericaninanyothercity.Close
behindAmericanstudentsareItalianandCzechstudents,bothfromdeveloped,primarily
CaucasiannationswhichusesomeversionoftheRomanalphabet.
FurtherdownthechartlandsChinawithascoreof7.947,followedbyVietnamwitha
scoreof9.000.Inbothcases,thesearedeveloped,primarilynonCaucasiannationswhichusea
completelynonRomansystemofwrittenlanguage.Furthermore,theChineseportionof
WashingtonAcademyisthesinglelargestofallnationalitiesrepresentedinthedormpopulation.

ThesefactorstogethermayaccountbothfortheirrelativeisolationfromAmericannondorm
studentsandforstatisticsthatwillappearlater.Finally,thepositionsofJamaica,Guatemala,
Rwanda,andRussiaaredifficulttoexplainwithanydegreeofaccuracywithoutresortingto
biased,unscientificracialstereotypes.Whetherthesecountrieslandedwheretheydidsimply
becauseofaflukeofthedataorwhetherthereisanunderlyingcauseforthesestatisticsremains
tobeseen,andcouldbethesubjectofafollowupstudy.

Section2:
Questionfiveaskedparticipantsinthesurveytolistthenationalitiesofthefivepeople
withwhomtheyinteractedthemostinorderfrommostinteractiontoleastinteraction.Ineffect,
itestablishedwhichnationalitiesinteractedwithwhichotheronesthemost.Fortworeasons,the
dataanalyzedonlyconcernthefirstanswer.Firstly,theprimaryinteractionisthemost
numericallytellingone,asitprovidesthebestcrosssectionofhowculturalgroupsinterfacewith
eachother.Secondly,iftheotherfourresponseswereincluded,thedatasetwouldhave
exceededthecapacityofourcomputationalabilities.
Figure2.1showsacompoundgraphoftherelativefrequencieswithwhichstudentsfrom
eachcountrylistedstudentsfromeachothercountryastheirnumberoneinteraction.Insome
cases,certaincountriesarenotlistedatallasprimarycontacts,suchasBrazil,orareonlylisted
asprimarycontactsbyotherstudentsfromthesamecountry,suchasRwanda.Thisispartially
duetothefactthat,forstudentprivacyreasons,SpainandBrazilarenotlistedonthischart.
ChinaandRwandabothlisttheirowncountryasthemajorityofstudentcontacts.Thismaybe
correlatedwiththefactthattheybothlieintheupper75%ofpossible x scoresonquestionfour.

Interestingly,Russia,withthehighest x onquestionfour,alsolistsonlyanothercountry,the
UnitedStatesofAmerica(questionfour x of4.333,thelowestofallcalculatedscores),asits
primaryinteractionsource.Thisisparticularlychallengingtoexplain,asitcontradictsevery
trendseenthusfar.

Fig.2.1:Agraphshowingwhichcountriesstudentsfromeachcountrylistedastheirprimary
sourcesofinteractionsonadaytodaybasis.Forinstance,itcanbeseenthatItalianstudents
listed50%Italianstudentsand50%Czechstudentsastheirprimarycontacts.

Inmanycases,itmaybeseenfromFigure2.1thatnoteverylistingismutual.Thatis,a
countrythatislistedasaprimarycontactbyanothermaynotbelistedassuchinturn.For
example,33.3%ofRwandanstudentslistedChinaastheirprimarysourceofinteraction.
However,noChinesestudentslistRwandaasthesame.Infact,55.6%ofuniquelistingsof

countrieswhosedatahadnotbeenremovedfromthischartforreasonsofprivacyorstatistical
significancewerenotmutual.Figure2.2chartsthesedataandmarkswhicharemutualand
whicharenot.InthecaseoftheCzechRepublicsUnitedStateslisting,thismaybeatleast
partiallyexplainedbythefactthattheCzech x onquestionfourisamongthelowestofall
countriesincludedinthisdataset,with33.33%ofCzechstudentslistingascoreof4onquestion
four,meaningthatoverhalfofalltheirinteractionsadailybasisarewithstudentswholive
outsideofthedorms.Thiscorrelateswiththe33.33%ofCzechstudentswhononmutuallylisted
theUnitedStatesastheirprimaryinteractionsource.Thismeansthatitisentirelypossiblethata
largeportionofthisprimarylistingis,infact,nondormstudentsatWashingtonAcademywho
werenotpolledand,therefore,couldnotshowwhetherthisratingwasmutualornot.

China:

Czech
Republic:

Guatemala:

Italy:

Jamaica:

Russia:

Rwanda:

U.S.A:

Listing:

Vietnam

Guatemala

Jamaica

Czech
Republic

Czech
Republic

U.S.A

China

Vietnam

U.S.A

Fig.2.2:Achartofmutual,nonremoveddatapertainingtolistingsoftopinteractionsbetween
studentsofeachnationalityinthechart.Bluelistingsaremutual,redlistingsarenotmutual.

Inothercases,validexplanationsofmutualityaremoredifficulttofind.Figure2.3
comparesnonmutuallistingswiththerespectivequestionfour x scoresofthelisterandthe
listed.Interestinglyenough,theonlycommonfactorbetweenallfivesuchcasesisthatineach
instance,thepercentageofrespondersfromthelistingcountrywholistedthenonmutual
listedcountrywas50%orless.However,inanumberofmutualcases,thisscorewasalso
50%orless.Giventhesevagueries,itissafetoconcludethatcountryoforiginhaslittletodo

withthemutualityofnetworkformationwithstudentsfromothernations,andisinsteadcaused
bytheindividualcharactersofthestudentsthemselves.

Country...:

NonMutually
Lists:

Percentage
WhichMade
ThisListing:

Lister x :

Listed x :

CzechRepublic

U.S.A

33.33%

6.000

4.333

Italy

CzechRepublic

50.00%

5.000

6.000

Jamaica

CzechRepublic

50.00%

7.000

6.000

Rwanda

China

33.33%

9.000

7.947

U.S.A

Vietnam

33.33%

4.333

9.000

Fig.2.3:Atableofcountrieswhichnonmutuallylistedothersastheirprimaryinteraction
source,andacollectionofstatisticsaboutthesecountries.

Section3:
Questionfiveaskedstudentsinwhich,ifany,BlockFive(classestakenbydormstudents
afterschoolhours)activitiesorsportstheyparticipated.Theresultswerecountedandtabulated
andtherawvaluesdisplayedinFigure3.1,alongwiththecorrespondingcountriesquestionfour
x values.Duetothedifferingunits,theserawvalueswerenormalizedbyconvertingthemtoa
proportionofthemaximumvalueforeachstatistic.Thenormalizedvaluesaredisplayedin
Figure3.2.ItisworthnotingthatsomestudentslistedactivitieswhichareneitherBlockFive
classesnorsports,butwhichwerecountedinthefinaltotalduetothelargenumberofstudents
whoreportedtheminthisway.Blankspacesontheformwere,forthisquestion,enteredasa
0.Fromtheseresults,ageneraltrendmaybeobserved.Higherquestionfour x values,

indicativeoflessoutofdorminteraction,tendtocorrelate(withafewnotableexceptions),with
lowerquestionfive x values,indicativeofhigherlevelsofparticipationinextracurricular
activities.However,thiscorrelationshouldpossiblybereadintheotherdirection.Itmakes
intuitivesensethatmoreparticipationinafterschoolactivitieswouldleadtomoreencounters
withnondormstudents.
Country:

MeanNumberof
ExtracurricularActivities
(QuestionFive x ):

QuestionFour x :

China

0.833

7.947

CzechRepublic

0.667

6.000

Guatemala

0.667

9.000

Italy

5.000

Jamaica

1.5

7.000

Russia

10.000

Rwanda

0.333

9.000

U.S.A

4.333

Vietnam

9.000

Fig.3.1:Arawtableofmeannumberofextracurricularactivitiesandmeannumberof
interactionswithdormstudentsoutofeveryteninteractions,sortedbycountry.

Country:

NormalizedQuestionFive x :

NormalizedQuestionFour x :

China

0.2776666667

0.7947

CzechRepublic

0.2223333333

0.6

Guatemala

0.2223333333

0.9

Italy

0.3333333333

0.5

Jamaica

0.5

0.7

Russia

Rwanda

0.111

0.9

U.S.A

0.4333

Vietnam

0.3333333333
0.9
Fig.3.2:Anormalizedtableofmeannumberofextracurricularactivitiesandmeannumberof
interactionswithdormstudentsoutofeveryteninteractions,sortedbycountry.

Section4:
Fromtheresultsofthesesurveyquestions,anumberofgeneraltrendscanbeobserved.
Forinstance,studentsintheWashingtonAcademydormstendtointeractmostlywithother
dormstudents.StudentsfromculturesmoresimilartoAmericanculture,orstudentsfrom
America,statisticallyhavethehighestlevelsofoutofdorminteraction.Theselevelstendto
dropoffwithincreasinglargedifferencesbetweenstudentscountriesoforiginandAmerica.
Noclear,persistent,detectablecorrelationwasfoundbetweencountryoforiginofdorm
studentsandcountryoforiginofstudentswithwhichthesedormstudentsinteractedthemost
frequently.Itwasnoted,however,thatinmanycases(55.6%ofrecordedinstances),these
statisticswerenotmutual.StudentsfromcountryAwouldlistcountryBasthecountryoforigin
ofthestudentorstudentswithwhichtheyinteractedthemost,butstudentsfromcountryB
wouldnotthenlistcountryAasthesame.Whetherthisissimplyastandardmechanicofyoung
adultinteractionhasnotyetbeenstatisticallydetermined.Asimilarsurveyofnondorm
students,allfromthesamecountry,allattendingthesameschool,mightwellbeinorderto
determinethestatisticalsignificanceoftheseresults.

Finally,aweakcorrelationappearstobepresentbetweenoutofdorminteractionand
extracurricularactivities.Generally,higherlevelsoftheformercorrelatewithhigherlevelsof
thelatter.Thismakesacertaindegreeofintuitivesense,asallstudents,dormresidentsand
otherwise,areencouragedtoparticipateinextracurriculars.Thisexposesdormstudentsto
greaternumbersofnondormstudentsinasocialsettingthantheymayotherwisehave
experienced.
Therewere,ofcourse,anumberofinherentsourcesofpotentialerrorinourdata
collectionandanalysis.Thesurveyswere,forreasonsofconsistency,allidenticalineveryway
(withtheexceptionofthehandwrittenformnumberinthecorner),meaningthattheywereall
writteninAmericanEnglish.Therefore,reliabilityofthedataobtainedwasentirelydependent
onassumingafairlyuniformlevelofEnglishcomprehension.Giventhediversebackgroundsof
thestudentswhoreceivedthesurveyforms,itisnotfairtoassumethatthiswouldbethecase.
Certainanswers,whichcannotbewrittenhereforprivacyreasons,givenonahandfulofforms
tendtocorroboratethishypothesis.
Anadditionalsourceoferrorwasthesubjectivenatureofourdecisionswithregardsto
nonstandardanswersthatwerenotintheformatthattheformrequested.Ifananswerwasgiven
thatwasnearly,butnotexactly,thetypeofanswerthatwasrequired,theclosestapproximation
availableoftheactualanswerwasenteredintothedata.Incaseswheretheanswerwas
completelyincorrectlyformatted(ie.Chinainresponsetoaquestionwhichlookedfora
numericalanswer).
Finally,thestudentsthemselvesmayhavebeenasourceoferror.Inonecase,onlythe
firstpagewasfilledout.Thisformwas,accordingly,discardedfromthedataset.Inanother,two

formsofsequentialnumbers(49and50)wereonlypartiallyfilledout,containingidenticaldata
onpageone,followedbythephraseWEAREONEandblankspacesontherestoftheform.
Thedatathatwaspresentwasentered.However,theseincidentsdemonstratedthatcertain
studentsmaynothavetakenthesurveyentirelyseriously,whichwouldimpactthereliabilityof
thedata.
Theoverallconclusionsdrawnfromthisstudywerefairlysimple.Nationalorigindo,in
fact,havesomeeffectonsocialnetworkingandsociallifeamongstteenagehighschoolstudents.
However,forthemostpart,inarelativelysterileenvironment,studentsfromaroundtheworld
willinteractinmoreorlessthesamewayasstudentsofanysetofdistinctsocialgroups.Further
research,possiblyreplicatingthissurveywithasamplingofstudentsattendinganonboarding
schoolintheirhomecountry,wouldlikelyprovideclarifyingdata.Certainaspects,detailed
above,ofthisstudymayalsomeritadditionalstudy.

ParticularThanksTo:
NinaNikoliov,forhelpingdesign,implement,andanalyzealltheresultsfromthisstudyand
forputtingupwithmy(possiblyslightlyabsurd)standardsofdatacleanliness.
Ms.Axe,forgivingusclasstimetoworkonthisstudy.
Mr.Morang,forassistingwiththelogisticsofconductingthisstudy.
Mr.Reynolds,forauthorizingthisstudyandourmethods.
TheentireAdmissions,Guidance,andResidentialLifedepartments,fortheirhelpingathering
thedatanecessarytosetupthisstudyandfordistributingtheforms.
SophiaQin,forbetatestingthesurveyforcomprehensibility.

TheWashingtonAcademydormstudents,fortheirwillingparticipationinthisstudy.