Networks of Political Action: Toward Theory Construction

An Overview of Social Networks and Economic Applications

“…Homophily can also be driven by preferences: students may prefer to associate with other students of the same age since their interests and maturity will be similar. The role of biases in contact as a source of homophily is discussed by Allport (1954), Blau (1977), Feld (1981), Rytina and Morgan (1982), and the role preferences for associating with individuals with similar traits, behaviors, or backgrounds is discussed by Cohen (1977), Kandel (1978), Knoke (1990), and Currarini, Jackson and Pin (2008 and Bramoullé and Rogers (2009). There are also other reasons that homophily might arise, including competition among groups (Giles and Evans (1986)), social norms and culture (Carley 1991)), institutional and organizational pressures (Meeker an Weiler (1970), Khmelkov and Hallinan (1999), Kubitschek and Hallinan (1998), Stearns (2004)).…”

Social isolation, survey nonresponse, and nonresponse bias: An empirical evaluation using social network data within an organization

“…General population surveys without extensive follow-up attempts and recruitment efforts thus are likely to be systematically missing people with fewer network connections in general and social isolates in particular, thus leading to biases in variables that have been shown to be related to network connections, such as educational and occupational attainment (Paldony and Baron, 1997;Thomas, 2000), political participation (Knoke, 1990), religious attendance (Rote et al, 2013), aggression (Faris and Felmlee, 2011), and physical and mental health (Cornwell et al, 2012;Litwin, 2012). This finding also means that analysts should, where possible, consider the number of network connections to account for this differential nonresponse.…”

How do Civic Associations Foster Political Participation? The Role of Scope and Intensity of Organizational Involvement

“…They also help build and reinforce participants' identities and cultivate collective norms. Knoke (1990), for example, examines the networks of political action, arguing that when people discuss political matters with their intimates very frequently, their interests and participation in national campaigns and voting will be enhanced. In contrast, bridging ties are the weak ties that exist between groups, creating "brokerage opportunities" and providing non-redundant information (Burt 2000;Granovetter 1973).…”

“…The mobilization approach asserts that individuals are embedded in their social networks where contextual cues and political opportunities may be supplied and participation may be mobilized. Being asked to participate by one's political party, groups of affiliation, family, friends, or others in the social networks, makes one more likely to engage in political activities (e. g., Booth and Richard 1998;Brady, Schlozman, and Verba 1999;Bratton 1999;Huckfeldt and Sprague 1992;Kenny 1992;Knoke 1990). In the social movement literature, for example, many studies have highlighted the positive association between recruitment and the likelihood of one's engagement in protests, boycotts, or the like (Diani and McAdam 2003;Fernandez and McAdam 1988;McAdam and Paulsen 1993;Walker 2008).…”