Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T10:45:51.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - From Scott L. Feld, “The Focused Organization of Social Ties”

from III - Later Foundations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2021

Mario L. Small
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Brea L. Perry
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Bernice Pescosolido
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Edward B. Smith
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

The concept of a “focus of activity” was developed to describe the nature of non-network social structures that often underly the formation of intersecting clusters of ties in large-scale social networks. The primary purpose of the “focus theory” was to encourage network analysts to consider the impact of those underlying structures before attributing too much of the structure and consequences of social networks to psychological processes, individual choices, or self-contained network processes. We have been pleased to see that network researchers have increasingly considered the impacts of these non-network social structures. Nevertheless, we take this opportunity to clarify and extend the focus theory in ways that may make it more applicable and useful for more purposes. We show how the focus theory can be reconciled with some influential network theories that may initially appear inconsistent with it. We discuss how the focused organization facilitates indirect connections across large-scale social networks; and, we explicitly extend the focus theory by considering additional processes causing both the loss of old ties and the accumulation of new ties within clusters over time.

Type
Chapter
Information
Personal Networks
Classic Readings and New Directions in Egocentric Analysis
, pp. 350 - 359
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blau, Peter M. 1978. “A Macrosociological Theory of Social Structure.American Journal of Sociology 83: 2654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boissevain, Jeremy. 1968. “The Place of Non-Groups in the Social Sciences.” Man 3: 542–56.Google Scholar
Bott, Elizabeth. 1957. Family and Social Network. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
Cole, Stephen. 1975. “The Growth of Scientific Knowledge: Theories of Deviance as a Case Study,” pp. 175220 in The Idea of Social Structure: Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton, edited by Coser, Lewis A.. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Coleman, James S. 1957. Community Conflict. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Cubitt, Tessa. 1973. “Network Density among Urban Families,” pp. 6782 in Network Analysis: Studies in Human Interaction, edited by Boissevain, Jeremy and Clyde Mitchell, J.. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, James A. 1963. “Structural Balance, Mechanical Solidarity, and Interpersonal Relations.American Journal of Sociology 68: 444–62.Google Scholar
Davis, James A. 1967. “Clustering and Structural Balance in Graphs.Human Relations 20: 181–7.Google Scholar
Festinger, Leon, Schachter, S., and Back, K. 1950. Social Pressures in Informal Groups. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Claude S., Jackson, R. M., Stueve, C. A., Gerson, K., and Jones, L. M.. 1977. Networks and Places: Social Relations in the Urban Setting. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.American Journal of Sociology 78: 1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallinan, Maureen T. 1974. The Structure of Positive Sentiment. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Heider, Fritz. 1946. “Attitudes and Cognitive Organization.Journal of Psychology 21: 107–12.Google ScholarPubMed
Holland, Paul W., and Leinhardt, Samuel. 1970. “A Method for Detecting Structure in Sociometric Data.American Journal of Sociology 76: 492513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, Paul W., and Leinhardt, Samuel. 1971. “Transitivity in Structural Models of Small Groups.Comparative Group Studies 2: 107–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homans, George C. 1950. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.Google Scholar
Homans, George C. 1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt Brace, & Co.Google Scholar
Kadushin, Charles. 1966. “The Friends and Supporters of Psychotherapy: On Social Circles in Urban Life.American Sociological Review 31: 786802.Google Scholar
Kapferer, Bruce. 1973. “Social Network and Conjugal Role in Urban Zambia: Towards a Reformulation of the Bott Hypothesis,” pp. 83110 in Network Analysis: Studies in Human Interaction, edited by Boissevain, Jeremy and Clyde Mitchell, J.. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laumann, Edward O. 1973. Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Merton, Robert K.. 1964. “Friendship as Social Process: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis,” pp. 1866 in Freedom and Control in Modern Society, edited by Monroe Berger, T. Abel, and Page, C. H.. New York: Octagon Books.Google Scholar
Leinhardt, Samuel. 1972. “Developmental Change in the Sentiment Structure of Children’s Groups.American Sociological Review 37: 202–12.Google Scholar
Logan, John R. 1978. “Growth, Politics, and the Stratification of Places.American Journal of Sociology 84: 404–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, Stanley. 1967. “The Small World Problem.Psychology Today 1: 60–7.Google Scholar
Mintz, Beth, and Schwartz, Michael. 1979. “The Power Structure of Business.” Unpublished manuscript, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Department of Sociology.Google Scholar
Moreno, Jakob L. 1953. Who Shall Survive. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Newcomb, Theodore M. 1961. “The Acquaintance Process as a Prototype of Human Interaction,” pp. 259–61 in The Acquaintance Process, edited by Theodore Newcomb. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. https://doi.org/10.1037/13156-015Google Scholar
Simmel, Georg. 1955. Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Verbrugge, Lois M. 1977. “The Structure of Adult Friendship Choices.Social Forces 56: 576–97.Google Scholar
Verbrugge, Lois M. 1979. “Multiplexity in Adult Friendships.Social Forces 57: 1286–309.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

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×