Upload
arnold-jennings
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Announcements Treat Local and Cosmopolitan Networks Small Worlds (Milgram, Watts) Weak Ties (Granovetter)
Not functional
1
Minimal
Function2
Functional/not
mastered3
Functional/minor proble
ms4
Full success
5
Clear identification of individual factors
Clear identification of supra-individual factors
Discussion of inter-play between individual and social factors
Appropriate use of empirical evidence, concepts, and or readings
Readability (top-down organization, good use of headings, clear sentences, no confusing passages)
Grammar and syntactical correctness (scored, but not included in final grade)
Primary Groups
Groups whose members have close and intimate emotional attachment to one another and to the group (strong sense of solidarity, loyalty)
Classic example: families Characteristic of gemeinschaft
Network Structure of Primary Groups
Strong ties Redundant ties (multiple paths
connecting nodes) Direct-person to person interaction Frequent interaction Clustered geographically (local) Self-contained
Significance of primary groups
• Members of groups characterized by strong and overlapping internal ties are likely to:– Share norms and beliefs– Trust each other– Recognize interdependence– Recognize each other as members of the
same group
Secondary groups
Groups whose members have only limited emotional attachment to one another, and weaker sense of belonging to a ‘group’ (weaker solidarity, little loyalty)
Classic examples: co-workers, members of a secondary association
Characteristic of gesellschaft
Network Structure of Secondary Groups
Full of ‘holes’ Weaker ties Scattered geographically Less face-to-face interaction
“Local”– Solidarity Emotional comfort Strong monitoring capacity (strong
influence) isolated
“Cosmopolitan” less solidarity Less conformity Access to more information
Local and Cosmopolitan nets
How small are our worlds?
Does person x know person y? Are they a ‘friend of a friend’? Why are we surprised to run into
someone who knows someone we know?
Travers and Milgram experiment
How could person x get in touch with person y?
Task: Get a letter to an arbitrary “target”: Boston Stockbroker
Randomly selected sample in Nebraska (included some stockbrokers)
Randomly selected sample in Boston Total sample = 296
217 sent it onto friends64 reached target (29%)
Average chain length: about six steps!
Findings
Many used geographic information to move letter, then it circled around for a while
Many tried to get the letter to someone they new in the financial industry
Men had shorter chains than women
Small World Number
Average number of steps, (jumps, links) between two people
In general, lower for people with higher social status
Though women have more friends than men, historically have tended to be more disconnected from the world
Strength of Weak Ties
•Weak ties are very important for spreading information •Less effective at exerting influence
Weak tie (bridge)