42
TODAY Lecture 1 part 1 (40 mins). What is social network analysis? Brief history Tutorial 1 (30 mins) Organization of groups and selection of topics Lecture 1 part 2 (40 mins) Data collection Workshop 1 (30 mins) Facebook demonstration (10 mins)

Lecture 1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: Lecture 1

TODAY

• Lecture 1 part 1 (40 mins).What is social network analysis? Brief history

• Tutorial 1 (30 mins)Organization of groups and selection of topics

• Lecture 1 part 2 (40 mins)Data collection

• Workshop 1 (30 mins)

• Facebook demonstration (10 mins)

Page 2: Lecture 1

LECTURE 1: PART 1

Why study networks?

Many phenomena seem to be structured as networks:- Neural networks- Circulatory systems- Organizations- Economies- Ecologies- …

An actor’s position in a network shapes opportunities and constrains, and may be able to predict outcomes of her behaviour.What happens to people an actor is connected to may influence her own behaviour as wellEg: I want to sell my product in china, I need a Chinese contact who introduces me to the market. Eg: I want to get involved in a student political movement to support gay marriage, but my parents are strongly against itEg: all my friends have bought an iphone, it is more likely that I will buy one as well

Page 3: Lecture 1

What are networks? Relationships among entities. - Social and inanimate- Individual and collective

EgonetworksWhole networksDEPENDENCIES

Actors and attributes• Categorical (male/female)• Continuous (56 year old)• Ordinal (low class/middle class/upper class)

Relationships• Multiple (being married, being co-

workers, living together)• Valued (continuous, having known each

other for 56 years, or ordered, like exchanging emails once a week, every month)

• Directed• Indirect connections (chains and paths)

Page 4: Lecture 1

What are relations? What are the differences between relational status and events?

Each tie gives a corresponding network. Multiple ties produce multiple networks (friendship, advises, etc.) Relational states: continuous and persistent relationships Relational events: discrete eventsStates: • Similarities: antecedents and consequences of social ties, occasions• Roles: permanent relations• Cognition: thought and feelings people have of each other, not directly observable, but

inferred from interaction or directly asked to peopleEvents: • Interaction: observable behaviours between two people• Flow: outcomes of interactions, tangible (money) and intangible(information, beliefs)

Relationalstates

Relational events

Similarities Relational roles Relational cognition Interact ions

Flows

Location Participation Attribute KinshipOther Role Affective

Percep tual

Same spatial and temporal space

Same clubs, same events

Same gender, same attitude

Mother of, sibling of

Friend of,boss of,student of, competitor

Likes, hates Knows,

knows of, sees as happy

Sold to, talked to, helped, fought with

Information, beliefs, money

Page 5: Lecture 1

What is the goal of network analysis?

Network variables as independent/explanatory: network processes are used to explain and predict outcomes.-Brokers may have advantages-Closure my be restraining-Centrality may produce stress

Network variables as dependent/outcomes:- Homophily may explain relationship formation

Network variables as independent/explanatory Network variables as dependent/outcomes

Dyad levelFriendship between pairs of farmers to predict which pairs of farmers make the same decision about going organic

Similarity of interests (e.g., sky diving) to predict who becomes friends with each other

Node levelCentrality in organizational trust network to predict who is chosen for promotion

Extraversion to predict who becomes central in friendship network

Network levelShortness of paths in a group’s communication network to predict group’s ability to solve problems

Type of organizational culture (emphasizing either cooperation or competition) to predict structure of the trust network

Page 6: Lecture 1

Brief history of SNASee:Freeman L. C., 2004, The development of social network analysis, Empirical Press, Vancouver.Prell C., 2012, Social Network Analysis. History, theory and methodology, Sage, London. Chapter 2: 19-52.

SNA emerged out from- Psychology- Social anthropology- SociologyBut since the origin it was interdisciplinary: Elizabeth Both first anthropologist, then psychologist; Mayo (psychology) and Warner (social anthropology)

Page 7: Lecture 1

Psychology

• Jacob MorenoStudent of psychiatry in Vienna, then moved to US in 1925 and developed sociometry (30s)How social relations affect psychological well being. Sociograms are visual depictions of individuals and their relationships. Sociometry faded in the 50s: frustration for the difficulties in uncovering meaningful patters when networks reach a certain size.In the 40s, mathematicians started using matrices and graph theory to meet this demand.

• Kurtin LewinHe similarly studied Gestalt theory (vs behaviourists) and moved to US in 1930s. In 1945 he became the director of the Research Centre for Group Dynamics, MIT.Field theory: the totality of coexisting facts which are conceived of as mutually interdependent.

Page 8: Lecture 1

Psychology

• Alex BavelasStudent of Lewin, and director of the Group Networks Laboratory (at MIT, from Lewin centre). They began studying the effects of different communication network structures on the speed and accuracy with which a group could solve problems.

Development of the concept of centrality: centralactors are optimally positioned for integrating Information from dislocated parts of the network.Centralization as a global measure

• Luce and Perry, and the concept of clique

Page 9: Lecture 1

Psychology

• Festinger, Cartwright and HararySecond centre to spring out of MIT, at University of Michigan (50s). Collaboration with UK (1947). Through the journal Human relations influence over E. Bott• Balance theory from Heider: they re-defined it in structural terms using graph theory, extending it from individual cognitive statesto any social phenomena that could be represented in network terms.

• Current psychological work:- Social influence- Homophily- Social exchange theory

Page 10: Lecture 1

Social Anthropology

• Radcliffe BrownUK, Australia, Chicago, Oxford with Gluckman, etc.Structuralist, but with more emphasis on social relations that structural functionalism.Networks can help to move beyond abstract concepts (reifications) of culture and class.• Lloyd WarnerStudent of Radcliffe Brown who moved to Harvard and worked with Mayo to the research at the Western Electric Company and at the Hawthorne factory.Yankee city study, anthropological study of a urban setting.In Chicago Deep South, on the impact of race differences on social stratification (2 mode Davis data).

Page 11: Lecture 1

Social Anthropology

• Max GluckmanFirst chair of Manchester’s dept. of social anthropology and sociology50s and 60s: Manchester school.Study of social networks in natural settings, cross cutting ties in the development of conflicts.• James Clyde Mitchell British sociologist who followed Gluckman in Manchester in 1965 as Chair in Urban Studies. Clyde was interested in the study of social structure through the observation of regular patterns of social relations that persist over time. Social networks as an opportunity to mix the qualitative and thick descriptions of the cultural peculiarities of structural environments with a “non-quantitative mathematical way of rigorously stating the implications entailed in a set of relationships” (Mitchell 1969: 1).

Sociology’s 50th Anniversary at Manchester!Come raise a glass of wine (and eat some birthday cake) with us Thursday 6th February, 4-6pm in the Arthur Lewis Building Common Room.

Page 12: Lecture 1

Social Anthropology

London School of Economics

• Elizabeth BottMany contacts with the Manchester school.Married couples and personal networks.Density• John BarnesBott’s colleague, and the first one to use the term social networks in a fiend study• Siegfrid NadelRole analysis

MIXED METHODS APPROACH

Page 13: Lecture 1

Sociology

• Simmel: - dyads and triads- differentiation of social circlesPeculiarities of urban societies in relation not only to the increase in the population size, but in the consequential differentiation of social circles where the structure of social relations is organised in multiple, sparse and partially overlapping clusters. • References to the fundamental role of interconnections as irreducible elements of social

life can be found across a vast range of thinkers like Marx, Tönnies, Spencer, Weber, Durkheim.

• Pareto: elites are constantly reproduced by individuals and their investment in relationships

• Harvard: interest in Pareto, Warner, Parsons, Merton, Mayo. Mayo supervises Homans. Homans develops a theory of social relations and social groups. Small group research (50s)

Page 14: Lecture 1

Sociology

At the same time of Homans, Merton was at Harvard, who lately trained Coleman, Blau, Kadushin.

• ColemanDiffusion and social capital• KadushinSimmel’s social circles• Blau moved to Columbia, and trained DavisClusteringTransitivityTriad census (Holland and Leinhardt)

Page 15: Lecture 1

Sociology

At Harvard in the 70s

Harrison WhiteMaths, physics and sociology.Chains of opportunity applies algebraic models to the study of the job market.Whole networks VS egonets (Manchester school)Block modelling and positional analysis

Among his students:GranovetterBonacich (centrality measures)Wellman

Page 16: Lecture 1

The Mitchell Centre• Established in 2009• Nick Crossley, Martin Everett, Gemma Edwards, Elisa Bellotti, Susan

O’Shea, Kathryn Oliver, Mark Tranmer (CCSR), Johan Koskinen (CCSR)

• Interests in social movements, covert networks, music networks, scientific networks, personal networks, health networks, inter-organizational networks…

• Mixed methods, development of methods for one mode and two mode networks, multilevel analysis, network modelling, and network dynamics

Page 17: Lecture 1

http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/mitchell/ MAILING LIST

SEMINAR SERIES EVERY WEDNESDAY 4pm. CHECK FB, BLACKBOARD OR THE WEBSITE FOR DETAILS. SOCIAL TRIP TO THE PUB (AND DINNER) AFTERWARDS. EVERYBODY IS WELCOME!

Page 18: Lecture 1

TUTORIAL

Page 19: Lecture 1

LECTURE 1: PART 2

Data collection

Marsden P. V., 1990, Network data and measurement, Annual Review of Sociology, 16: 435-463.

Social structures as patterns of specifiable relations of social units. Social structures place opportunities and constrains on individual action according to one’s position.Opportunities: social resources, social capital, social support.Distinction between:1. Existing social relations: important for diffusion mechanisms/Perceived networks (cognitive): importance for social influence on attitudes and opinions2. Momentary reactions/Routinised and recurrent relationships

Page 20: Lecture 1

Boundaries specifications

Focus on interdependencies, therefore the omission of nodes (and relationships) would alter the overall structure

Realist approach: subjective perception of actors who belong to the networkNominalist approach: observer standpoint

Egonets: • star, first zone, second zone• Unlimited VS limited number of alters• Type of ties• Alter’s roles and attributes• Normal sampling

Whole networks• Membership criteria (roster method)• Snowball• Participation (eg: events)

Page 21: Lecture 1

How to collect data

• Name generator (egonet and whole net). Ego attributes, ego-alter ties, alter attributes, alter-alter ties

• Position generator (egonet). Ego attributes, frequency of ego-alter ties (with no names), alter ties attributes

• Resource generator (egonet), Ego attributes, frequency of ego-alter ties (with no names), alter ties attributes

Data collected via• Surveys• Qualitative interviews• Ethnographic observations• Archival data

Page 22: Lecture 1

Name generator

Question Answer Data-Who did you discuss matters important to you in the last 3 months?-Who would you discuss matters important to you with?

JohnJackBob

Ego John Jack Bob

-Who did you ask for advice in the past 3 months?

John 2 timesJack 3 timesBob 1 time

Ego John Jack Bob

-Who has lent you money?-Who did you lend money to?

Bob 15000£Jack 10000£

John 25000£

Ego John Jack Bob

Can be used for egonetworks as well as whole networks.

Page 23: Lecture 1

Who did you lend money to? Who did you borrow money from?

How much? How much?John 25000 0Bob 0 15000Jack 0 10000….

Who did lend money to who, of which you are aware?

John Bob JackJohn 0 5000 3000Bob 2500 0 0Jack 0 7000 0

Alters’ atttributesGender Age No. Of kids

John 1 50 3Bob 1 46 0Jack 1 72 2

Page 24: Lecture 1

Adjacency MatricesBinary

Jim Jill Jen JoeJim - 1 0 1Jill 1 - 1 0Jen 0 1 - 1Joe 1 0 1 -

ValuedJim Jill Jen Joe

Jim - 3 9 2Jill 3 - 1 15Jen 9 1 - 3Joe 2 15 3 -

Jim

Jill

Jen

Joe

3

2

9

1

153

Page 25: Lecture 1

Directed vs undirected ties• Undirected relations

– Attended meeting with– Communicates daily with

• Directed relations– Lent money to

• Logically vs empirically directed ties– Empirically, even un-

directed relations can be non-symmetric due to measurement error Bob

Betsy

Bonnie

Betty

Biff

Page 26: Lecture 1

Position generator

Do you know anyone who is a/an U&S2 ISEI3 % yes acq. friend

family member

lawyer 86 83 47 40 25 35

doctor 84 87 50 41 19 40

policymaker 82 70 45 33 28 39

engineer 76 68 65 24 21 56

informationtechnologist 68 70 66 30 27 42

manager 67 69 66 21 27 52

directorcompany 67 69 71 24 24 52

tradeunionmanager 66 65 17 57 20 23

scientist 65 71 42 26 28 46

highercivilservant 64 61 53 35 21 44

Source: Position Generator measures and their relationship to other Social Capital measures Martin Van der Gaag, Tom A.B. Snijders, Henk D. Flaphttp://www.xs4all.nl/~gaag/work/PG_comparison.pdf

Page 27: Lecture 1

Resources generator

Source: Position Generator measures and their relationship to other Social Capital measures Martin Van der Gaag, Tom A.B. Snijders, Henk D. Flaphttp://www.xs4all.nl/~gaag/work/PG_comparison.pdf

Page 28: Lecture 1

Roster method (whole networks)

Here there is the list of people who work in your office

WIthin them, who do you ask for advice?

Bill 2

Joe 0

Anna 0

Carol 1

Everyone belonging to the network has to fill in the questionnaire

Page 29: Lecture 1

Surveys

Realist approach: they elicit ego’s subjective perception of actors who belong to his/her network.

They can focus on • the content of exchange between people, by asking whom ego discuss important

matters with, or socialise (exchange approach)• the role of the relationship, by asking to list friends, neighbours, co-workers, and the

like (role-relational approach)• the strength of the relation, but asking whom ego feels especially close to (affective

approach)• the frequency of communication, by asking whom ego is in contact with (how often, via

which media) over a certain period of time (interactional approach)• the locality of ties, by asking who lives nearby or in the same geographical area

(geographical approach).

Page 30: Lecture 1

Surveys

• Laumann (1973): in 1965 surveyed 1013 native-born, white men, between the ages of 21 and 64, in the greater metropolitan area of Detroit, asking them about three closest network members.

• Wellman (1993): designed the sociological component of a series of East York studies. Large study administered in 1967 and 1968. Survey of 845 respondents, to whom he asked the names of all the people living in their household, and the initials of the people outside the household that they feel closest to. The name generator asked only the about the first six people, but also added the information on how many they feel close to on top of these 6 (if any), which gives an approximation of the size of the network. Together with the list of names, Wellman also used name and ties interpreted, asking a wide range of alters’ attributes (role, sex, occupation, where they live) and the frequency, mean, and reason for contacts (how often they are seen, how often they are contacted by phone or letter, who they get together with informally, who provides help for everyday matters or in case of emergencies). Finally, alter-alter ties are collected.

Page 31: Lecture 1

Surveys

• Fischer (1982a), in his study of personal networks in 50 urban and rural Northern California communities, surveyed 1050 adults about their exchange of support (emotional companionship, material). He uses 10 different name generators and 19 name and tie interpreters. 8 of those interpreters are asked for all the names elicited, while 11 (gaining details about how long they have been known by ego, the frequency of contact, how they were met) are asked only for the first five alters named. For each pair of names he also asks if they know each other well, obtaining alter-alter ties.

• Burt (1984)Items for the US General Survey Election. Only one name generator is used that elicits names of people ego discussed personal matters during the previous six months. While no size boundaries are adopted, name interpreters are asked only for the first 5 people named, for whom a 3 grades strength of alter alter-ties is also administered. The strength of ego-alter ties is operationalized as especially close VS moderately close, frequency of contacts, years of acquaintance, relationship content (discussion topics), and role (kin, friend, etc.).

Page 32: Lecture 1

Visually aided data collection

Visualization is very common in social network analysis, but it is more often used in the analysis rather than in the collection of data• Fizgerald (1978) used a creative process for collecting relational information in Africa,

where she asked her respondents to write names of alters on plastic chips and to arrange them according to the strength of the tie.

• Commonly used is the target, which consist in a series of concentric circles where ego stands in the middle, and has to place the names of alters alongside the circles, following the guideline that the nearer to the centre the closest the relationship. This tool has been originally designed by Kahn and Antonucci (1980) and recently adopted, for example, by Spencer and Pahl (2006) in their study of friendship. No alter-alter ties

Page 33: Lecture 1

Qualitative interviews

Realist approach

Qualitative interviews in network research are not used differently from any other qualitative study, insomuch as they can take the form of semi-structured interviews, in-depth interviews, thematic interviews, or life histories. However, when adopted in the investigation of networks they normally aim at exploring the content of relationships, and the meaning of the overall structure of individual social environments. Mostly used in egonets, rarely in whole netsBy recording the subjective accounts of network structures, they aim to gain an insider view of the interactional processes which generate those structures (Edwards 2010).

Already in East York study

Page 34: Lecture 1

Qualitative interviews

• Bidart and Lavenu (2005) interviewed 66 young people living originally in Normandy (France), who were questioned every three years about the evolution of their personal networks and the events marking their entry into adult life.

• Hollstein (forthcoming) combines fuzzy set analysis of qualitative material and network data to investigate youth transition from school to work.

• Bellotti (2008a; 2008b) interviewed 23 single young adults living in Milan (Italy) about the composition, dynamics and outcomes of their friendship networks.

• Bernardi et al. (2007) interviewed 64 young adults living in two cities in Germany in order to investigate the social mechanisms at work or the variation in the composition of the networks of informal relationships in relation to fertility behaviour.

Page 35: Lecture 1

Ethnographic observations

More common for whole nets• Department of Social Anthropology and Sociology at the University of Manchester

mostly focussed on the use of observations for the mapping of interactions in various settings.

• Epstein for the study of the spread of gossip (Epstein 1969a and 1969b)• Kapferer used observations to map interactions between a group of African mine

employees who were engaged in surface work in the Cell Room of the Electro-Zinc Plant of the mine (Kapferer 1969: 184).

• Wheeldon (1969) studied a coloured community in Southern Africa, focussing the attention on six leaders who were frequently named by other members of the community

• Boswell (1969) observed the mobilization of personal networks during periods of crisis in the African city of Lusaka

Clyde Mitchell, 1969, (ed.), Social Networks in urban situations, Manchester University Press, Manchester.

Page 36: Lecture 1

Ethnographic observations

• Studies mapped concrete interactions in a group of deaf teletype users, between amateur radio operators, in a small social science research firm, and participants of a university graduate program (Bernard and Killworth 1977)

• Observation of interactions between drug users (Curtis et al. 1995)• Relationships between students, teachers, and parents in school classrooms (Haussling

2010)• Conversational interactions and speaking turns in meetings of managers (Gibson 2005)• Ethnographic studies of hidden populations (Schensul et al. 1999)• Classic study of an Italian slum in Chicago (Whyte 1943), shadowing an egonet• Similar to observations are diaries

Page 37: Lecture 1

Archival data

Whole net and egonetinformation is not created for the purpose of the research, but pre-exist the data collection process: this means that the researcher has a minimal influence in the production of the data, especially compared to other form of direct inquiry like surveys and interviews. Nominalist approach: data selected independently from actors’ perceptions, and according to the researcher’s goals• Interlocking directorates• Padgett and Ansell (1993): structure of relationships between oligarchic families in

Florence during Renaissance.• Crossley on the development of the punk scene in London (Crossley 2008b) and

Manchester (Crossley 2009) • Analysis of the structural advantages in obtaining funding in academic disciplines

(Bellotti 2012; forthcoming). • Edward and Crossley on the egonetwork of the suffragette Helen Kirkpatrick Watts

(Edward and Crossley 2009).

Page 38: Lecture 1

RECAP

• SNA as a way to formalise relational structures and dependencies between actors. Nodes and ties to visualise networks.

• Various types of nodes, and various types of relations

• SNA interdisciplinary. Psychology, social anthropology and sociology paths, all combined with mathematics.

• Egonet ad whole nets• Boundaries specifications in both approaches

• Nominalist VS realist approach

• Name generator• Position generator• Resource generator

• Survey• Interviews• Observations• Archival data

Page 39: Lecture 1

References

• Bellotti E., Qualitative networks. Mixing methods in social research, Routledge, London, forthcoming.• Bellotti, E., 2008a. What are friends for? Elective communities of single people, in Social Networks, 30, 318-329.• Bellotti, E., 2008b. Amicizie. Le reti social dei giovani single, Milano, F. Angeli.• Bernard R. H. and P. D. Killworth. 1977 Informant Accuracy in Social Network Data II. Human Communications Research

4:3–18.• Bernard, H. R., E. C. Johnsen, P. D. Killworth, C. McCarty, G. A. Shelley, and S. Robinson. 1990. Comparing four different

methods for measuring personal social networks. Social Networks 12 (3): 179–215.• Bernardi L., Keim S., von der Lippe H., 2007, Social Influences on Fertility: A Comparative Mixed Methods Study in

Eastern and Western Germany, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 1, 23 – 47.• Bidart C. e Lavenu D. (2005), «Evolution of personal networks and life events» in Social Networks, 27, pp. 359 – 376.• Borgatti S.P., Mehra A., Brass D.J., Labianca G., 2009, Network Analysis in the Social Sciences, Science, 13, 323, 5916:

892-895.• Brandes U., Robins G., McCranie A., Wasserman S., 2013, What is network science?, Network Science, 1, 1: 1-15.• Burt R., 1984, Network items and the general social survey, Social Networks, 6, 293 – 339.• Crossley, N. (2009) ‘The Man Whose Web Expanded: Network Dynamics in Manchester’s Post-Punk Music Scene 1976-

1980’, Poetics 37(1), 24-49.• Crossley, N. 2008b “Pretty Connected: the Social Network of the Early UK Punk Movement.” Theory, Culture and Society

25, 6: 89-116.• Curtis R, Friedman S, Neaigus A, Jose B, Goldstein M, Ildefonso G. Street level markets: network structure and HIV risk.

Social Networks. 1995;17:229–249.• Edwards, G. and Crossley, N. (2009) ‘Measures and Meanings: Exploring the Ego-Net of Helen Kirkpatrick Watts,

Militant Suffragette’, Methodological Innovations On-Line 4: 7-61.• Edwards, G., 2010. Mixed-Method Approaches to Social Network Analysis. Review paper, ESRC National Centre for

Research Methods.• Fischer, C.S., 1982a. To Dwell Among Friends. Personal Networks in Town and City. The University of Chicago Press,

Chicago and London.

Page 40: Lecture 1

• Fitzgerald, M. 1978. The content and structure of friendship: An analysis of the friendships of urban Cameroonians. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto.

• Freeman L. C., 2004, The development of social network analysis, Empirical Press, Vancouver.• Gibson D., 2005, Taking Turns and Talking Ties: Networks and Conversational Interaction, AJS 110 6: 1561–97• Häussling R., 2010, Allocation to Social Positions in Class : Interactions and Relationships in First Grade School Classes

and Their Consequences, Current Sociology 58, 1: 119 – 138.• Hollstein B., Fuzzy Set Analysis of Network Data as Mixed Method. Personal Networks and the Transition from School

to Work. In: Hollstein B. and Dominguez S. (Eds.): Mixed-Methods Social Network Research. New York: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.

• Kahn, R. L., & Antonucci, T. C. (1980). Convoys over the life course. Attachment, roles, and social support. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (pp. 254–283). New York: Academic Press.

• Laumann, E. O., 1973, Bond of Pluralism: The Forms and Substance of Urban Social Networks, Wiley, New York.• Lin N., and Dumin M., 1986, Access to occupations through social ties, Social Networks, 8, 365 – 385.• Marsden P. V., 1990, Network data and measurement, Annual Review of Sociology, 16: 435-463.• Mitchell, Clyde , 1969, (ed.), Social Networks in urban situations, Manchester University Press, Manchester.• Padgett John F., Ansell Christopher K., 1993, Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400-1434, The American

Journal of Sociology, Vol. 98, No. 6., pp. 1259-1319.• Prell C., 2012, Social Network Analysis. History, theory and methodology, Sage, London. Chapter 2: 19-52.• Schensul J. J., LeCompte M. D., Trotter II R. T., Cromley E. K., Singer M., 1999, Mapping social networks spatial data, and

hidden populations, Altamira Press, Plymouth.• Spencer, L., and R. Pahl. 2006. Rethinking friendship. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University• Van der Gaag Martin , Tom A.B. Snijders, Henk D. Flap, Position Generator measures and their relationship to other

Social Capital measures , http://www.xs4all.nl/~gaag/work/PG_comparison.pdf• Wellman B., 1993, An egocentric network tale: comment on Bien et al. (1991), Social Networks, 15, 423 – 436.• Whyte W. F., 1943, Street Corner Society. The social structure of an Italian slum. The University of Chicago press,

Chocago and London.

References

Page 41: Lecture 1

WORKSHOP 1

Page 42: Lecture 1

FACEBOOKCourse’s page

Egonet (for handout)