Reply to “Comment on Geodesic Cycle Length Distributions in Delusional and Other Social Networks”

Martin (2020) describes a misinterpretation of exponential random graph (ERGM) parameters in my contribution (Stivala 2020), with the use of this parametric model obscuring, rather than illuminating, the data. He suggests that this is symptomatic of a trend in the social networks community towards a methodological monoculture focussed on the use of ERGMs. In this Reply I try to clarify how this situation arose in this specific case, and address some more general issues Martin raises, including the use of nodal covariates, what we can learn from ERGMs, and methodological monoculturalism in social network research.