Trans‐Congregational Triadic Closure: Churchgoers’ Networks Within and Beyond the Pews

Abstract

Triadic closure is the common tendency for connections to emerge between people's social network ties. This phenomenon has clear implications for congregational networks and may underlie many of the social benefits associated with church involvement. Less documented in the sociology of religion, however, is the occurrence of triadic closure involving congregational and noncongregational relationships within people's close personal networks. To conceptualize this boundary‐spanning network overlap, we elaborate the concept of trans‐congregational triadic closure (TCTC). Using data from the Portraits of American Life Survey—a project that examines both general and congregation‐specific networks of U.S. adults—we consider how religious tradition, macro‐level context, and individual factors predict the occurrence of TCTC in churchgoers’ networks. Findings suggest pronounced differences between evangelicals and mainline Protestants, a considerably lower likelihood of TCTC in densely populated areas, and higher likelihoods of TCTC corresponding with long durations of congregational involvement. We conclude by noting some of the implications of TCTC for the lives of individual believers and for religious organizations, and suggest ways that this concept could elucidate further aspects of contemporary religious life.

A Social Network Analysis of Friendship and Spiritual Support in a Religious Congregation

“…Bounding the network in this way would continue to allow for social network questions, but with a more focused group (e.g., across time, do youth in the congregation become more similar in their religious beliefs?). Second, using ego‐network methods may allow researchers to examine how relational links exist both within and outside the congregation, opening up new and interesting questions about the interface between multiple types of networks (e.g., Schafer & Upenieks, ). Third, whole social network analysis may be used at the level of the congregation, for example, in understanding how all congregations in a city are linked in some way (e.g., through resource exchange, that leaders are linked).…”

“…Scholarship on religious relationships also extends outside the congregation, such as research showing that even for secular individuals, having a religious person in their personal social network predicts greater volunteering (Lim & MacGregor, ). Moreover, a few studies have used ego‐network data (e.g., individuals report on their friends, characteristics of their friends, and if their friends are linked; Marsden, ), to show that (a) having ties to someone in a religious congregation predicted receiving invitations to volunteer (Merino, ), (b) reporting more religiously conservative friends in one's personal network weakens the positive association between contact with LGBT people and support for same‐sex marriage (Merino, ), and (c) length of time in a congregation predicts transitive closure between religious and secular friends (i.e., that religious and secular friends also are friends; Schafer & Upenieks, ). These ego‐network studies demonstrate the importance of religion in personal friendship networks; yet, these studies do not locate relationships within a particular religious congregation or allow for the examination of relational social processes within a congregational setting.…”

Collective ritual and social support networks in rural South India

“…There is also value, though, in ‘bridging’ social capital, particularly weaker ties to those who have access to different knowledge and resources [ 63 – 66 ]. Maintaining relationships with members of other religions may then be a welcome complement to the benefits of embeddedness within the religious in-group [ 56 , 67 ].…”

“…Maintaining relationships with members of other religions may then be a welcome complement to the benefits of embeddedness within the religious in-group [56,67].…”

The Influence of Close Ties on Depression: Does Network Religiosity Matter?

“…As with traits such as age and ethnicity, people's networks tend to show similarity (homophily) on the basis of religion (Baker and Smith 2015; Fischer 1982; McPherson, Smith‐Lovin, and Cook 2001; Schafer and Upenieks 2016; Vaisey and Lizardo 2010). This suggests that shared religious beliefs matter to relationship formation.…”