Networks and Contexts: Variation in the Structure of Social Ties

Abstract

A core axiom of sociology is that social structure affects and is affected by human behavior. The term "social structure" conveys two quite different meanings. One meaning is relational, involving networks of ties between individuals or groups of individuals. A second meaning refers to the contexts containing these individuals. Studies of neighborhood and community effects depend on variability in both types of social structure. Using data from multiple villages in Nang Rong, Thailand, this article documents substantial variability in network structure and shows that network structure covaries with context in meaningful ways, suggesting reciprocal effects of changes in both. Finally, it considers implications of variability in network structure, showing that social cohesion affects the likelihood of finding and interviewing former village residents.A core axiom of sociology is that social structure affects and is affected by human behavior, but exactly what this means is not always clear. The term "social structure" has come to symbolize quite different aspects of the larger world in which people live. One meaning is relational, involving ties between individuals or groupings of individuals such as households. These ties may involve kinship, friendship, neighbor relations, social sup- 1 The research reported in this article was supported by grants R01-HD37896 and R01-HD25482 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. We would like to thank Erika Stone and Rick O'Hara for computer programming, Tom Swasey for graphics, Kammi Schmeer for assistance with literature, and Bridget Riordan for manuscript preparation. Helpful comments on earlier versions of this article were received from

Emergence of multiplex mobile phone communication networks across rural areas: An Ethiopian experiment

“…The problem is that reliable longitudinal multivariate data are lacking, and appropriate analytical methods that would enable formal theorizing through quantitative testing of hypotheses are under development (Entwisle et al, 2007;Kadushin, 2012). Paradoxically, current phone network studies are driven by the new availability of automatically collected society-wide datasets, which enable researchers to explore social interactions at an unprecedented scale (Onnela et al, 2007).…”

Case studies, cross-site comparisons, and the challenge of generalization: comparing agent-based models of land-use change in frontier regions

“…For instance, kinship and neighborhood-based networks may overlap to varying extents (Entwisle, Faust, Rindfuss, and Kaneda 2007), with consequences not only for land use directly through the sharing of information and (possibly) assistance, but also indirectly through consequences for related processes of migration, marriage, and household formation. Frontiers are particularly important strategic sites to study the importance of social networks for land use and other processes.…”

Dynamic Network Analysis with Missing Data: Theory and Methods

“…This growth stems primarily from advances in computational resources and statistical theory (particularly developments in the simulation and analysis of relational data), with additional recent impetus stemming from the rapid growth of Internet-based data collection (e.g., Leskovec, 2011). The scientific study of dynamic networks is pervasive in the social sciences, arising in the context of problems such as the evolution of friendship ties (e.g., Newcomb, 1961), communi-cation and face-to-face interaction over time (e.g., van de Rijt, 2011), the dynamics of disease transmission networks (e.g., sexual contact networks or needle sharing networks; Entwisle et al, 2007), emergent organizational networks during disaster response (e.g., Carley, 1999), and organizational collaboration dynamics (Powell et al, 1996). Beyond the social sciences, dynamic networks have been explored in computer science (e.g., online networks, see Leskovec, 2008), physics (e.g., coevolution of dynamical states and interactions, see Zimmermann et al, 2004) and engineering (e.g., human, cyber and physical traffic engineering, see Wang et al, 2006), among other fields.…”