Book contents
- Personal Networks
- Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences
- Personal Networks
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- I Background
- II Early Foundations
- III Later Foundations
- 8 From Claude S. Fischer, To Dwell among Friends
- From the Northern California Community Study, 1977–1978, to the University of California, Berkeley, Social Networks Project, 2015–2020
- 9 From Mark S. Granovetter, “The Strength of Weak Ties”
- Strength of Weak Ties in the Labor Market: An Assessment of the State of Research
- 10 From Barry Wellman and Scot Wortley, “Different Strokes from Different Folks”
- A Network Pilgrim’s Progress: Twenty-Six Realizations in Fifty-Five Years
- 11 From James S. Coleman, “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital”
- Three Decades of Research into Social Capital: Achievements, Blind Spots, and Future Directions
- 12 From Bernice A. Pescosolido, “Beyond Rational Choice”
- Confronting How People Cope with Crisis: From the Social Organization Strategy Framework to the Network Episode Model to the Network Embedded Symbiome
- 13 From Scott L. Feld, “The Focused Organization of Social Ties”
- Reflections on “The Focused Organization of Social Ties” and its Implications for Bonding and Bridging
- 14 From Ronald S. Burt, Structural Holes
- Structural Holes Capstone, Cautions, and Enthusiasms
- 15 From Edward O. Laumann, Peter V. Marsden, and David Prensky, “The Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis”
- On the Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis: An Update and Extension to Personal Social Networks
- 16 From Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M. Cook, “Birds of a Feather”
- The Enormous Flock of Homophily Researchers: Assessing and Promoting a Research Agenda
- 17 From Robert Huckfeldt and John Sprague, “Networks in Context”
- Individuals, Groups, and Networks: Implications for the Study and Practice of Democratic Politics
- 18 From Nan Lin, “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital”
- Social Capital: An Update
- 19 On the General Social Survey
- IV New Perspectives
- Index
- Recent Books in the Series
- References
Individuals, Groups, and Networks: Implications for the Study and Practice of Democratic Politics
from III - Later Foundations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 October 2021
Book contents
- Personal Networks
- Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences
- Personal Networks
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- I Background
- II Early Foundations
- III Later Foundations
- 8 From Claude S. Fischer, To Dwell among Friends
- From the Northern California Community Study, 1977–1978, to the University of California, Berkeley, Social Networks Project, 2015–2020
- 9 From Mark S. Granovetter, “The Strength of Weak Ties”
- Strength of Weak Ties in the Labor Market: An Assessment of the State of Research
- 10 From Barry Wellman and Scot Wortley, “Different Strokes from Different Folks”
- A Network Pilgrim’s Progress: Twenty-Six Realizations in Fifty-Five Years
- 11 From James S. Coleman, “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital”
- Three Decades of Research into Social Capital: Achievements, Blind Spots, and Future Directions
- 12 From Bernice A. Pescosolido, “Beyond Rational Choice”
- Confronting How People Cope with Crisis: From the Social Organization Strategy Framework to the Network Episode Model to the Network Embedded Symbiome
- 13 From Scott L. Feld, “The Focused Organization of Social Ties”
- Reflections on “The Focused Organization of Social Ties” and its Implications for Bonding and Bridging
- 14 From Ronald S. Burt, Structural Holes
- Structural Holes Capstone, Cautions, and Enthusiasms
- 15 From Edward O. Laumann, Peter V. Marsden, and David Prensky, “The Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis”
- On the Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis: An Update and Extension to Personal Social Networks
- 16 From Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M. Cook, “Birds of a Feather”
- The Enormous Flock of Homophily Researchers: Assessing and Promoting a Research Agenda
- 17 From Robert Huckfeldt and John Sprague, “Networks in Context”
- Individuals, Groups, and Networks: Implications for the Study and Practice of Democratic Politics
- 18 From Nan Lin, “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital”
- Social Capital: An Update
- 19 On the General Social Survey
- IV New Perspectives
- Index
- Recent Books in the Series
- References
Summary
In asking “Why Class Matters?” Brooks and Svallfors (2010) pose a central question, not only for the analysis of politics but also for the broader understanding of political, social, and economic behavior at the level of both individuals and groups. Moreover, the question reaches beyond the boundaries of social class to include a wide range of both individual characteristics and group properties. Why do income, education, ethnicity, race, and individually held political beliefs matter? To what extent are these various characteristics important as individually held properties, and to what extent are they important in the construction of the groups to which individuals belong?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Personal NetworksClassic Readings and New Directions in Egocentric Analysis, pp. 477 - 488Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Ahn, T. K., Huckfeldt, Robert, and Ryan, John Barry. 2014. Experts, Activists, and Democratic Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1997. The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent Based Models of Competition and Collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bassili, John N. 1993. “Response Latency versus Certainty as Indexes of the Strength of Voting Intentions in a CATI Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 57(1): 54–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassili, John N. 1995. “Response Latency and the Accessibility of Voting Intentions: What Contributes to Accessibility and How it Affects Vote Choice.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 21: 686–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassili, John N. 1996. “The How and Why of Response Latency Measurement in Telephone Surveys,” pp. 319–46 in Answering Questions: Methodology for Determining Cognitive and Communicative Processes in Survey Research, edited by Schwarz, N. and Sudman, S.. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.Google Scholar
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and McPhee, William N.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Election. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brooks, Clem, and Svallfors, Stefan. 2010. “Why Does Class Matter? Policy Attitudes, Mechanisms, and the Case of the Nordic Countries.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 28: 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1986. “A Note on Sociometric Order in the General Social Survey Network Data.” Social Networks 8(2): 149–89.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald. 2004. “Structural Holes and Good Ideas.” American Journal of Sociology 110: 349–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cataldo, Everett F., Johnson, Richard M., Kellstedt, Lyman A., and Milbrath, Lester W.. 1970. “Card Sorting as a Technique for Survey Interviewing.” Public Opinion Quarterly 34: 202–15.Google Scholar
Condorcet, Marquis de. 1976. Condorcet: Selected Writings. Edited, translated, and with an introduction by Baker, Keith Michael. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Emile. 1951. Suicide. Translated by John A. Spaulding and George Simpson. New York: Free Press. (Originally published in 1897.)Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H. 1990. “A Practical Guide to the Use of Response Latency in Social Psychological Research,” pp. 74–97 in Research Methods in Personality and Social Psychology 11, edited by Hendrick, Clyde and Clark, Margaret S.. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H. 1995. “Attitudes as Object-Evaluation Associations: Determinants, Consequences, and Correlates of Attitude Accessibility,” in Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, edited by Petty, R. E. and Krosnick, J. A.. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fuchs, Lawrence H. 1955. “American Jews and the Presidential Vote.” American Political Science Review 49: 385–401.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” The American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–80.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert. 1983. “Social Contexts, Social Networks, and Urban Neighborhoods: Environmental Constraints on Friendship Choice.” American Journal of Sociology 89: 651–69.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert. 1984. “Political Loyalties and Social Class Ties: The Mechanisms of Contextual Influence.” American Journal of Political Science 28: 399–417.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, Johnson, Paul E., and Sprague, John. 2004. Political Disagreement: The Survival of Diverse Opinions within Communication Networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, Pietryka, Matthew, and Reilly, Jack. 2014. “Noise, Bias, and Expertise in Political Communication Networks.” Social Networks 36: 110–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, and Sprague, John. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Matthew O. 2008. Social and Economic Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kunda, Ziva. 2001. Social Cognition: Making Sense of People. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Laumann, Edward O. 1973. Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul, Berelson, Bernard, and Gaudet, Hazel. 1948. The People’s Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles S.. 2013. The Rationalizing Voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makse, Todd, Minkoff, Scott, and Sokhey, Anand. 2019. Politics on Display: Yard signs and the Politicization of Social Spaces. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1956. On Liberty. Edited with an introduction by Shields, C. V.. Indianapolis, IN: Bobs-Merrill. (Originally published in 1859.)Google Scholar
Miller, Warren. 1956. “One-Party Politics and the Voter.” American Political Science Review 50: 707–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1974. “Contextual Models of Political Behavior.” Political Methodology 1: 27–61.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, and Sprague, John. 1986. Paper Stones. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1994. The Social Contract or the Principles of Political Right. New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published in 1762.)Google Scholar
Segal, David R., and Meyer, Marshall W.. 1974. “The Social Context of Political Partisanship,” pp. 217–32 in Social Ecology, edited by Dogan, Mattei and Rokkan, Stein. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sprague, John. 1976. “Estimating a Boudon Type Contextual Model: Some Practical and Theoretical Problems of Measurement.” Political Methodology 3: 333–53.Google Scholar
Tingsten, Herbert. 1963. Political Behavior: Studies in Election Statistics. Translated by Hammarling, Vilgot. Totowa, NJ: Bedminster. (Originally published in 1937.)Google Scholar
White, Harrison C., Boorman, Scott A., and Breiger, Ronald L.. 1976. “Social Structure from Multiple Networks. I. Blockmodels of Roles and Positions.” American Journal of Sociology 81: 730–80.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by