Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-12T01:01:18.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Social Network Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

By
Peter J. Carrington
Edited by
Silvia Domínguez  and
Betina Hollstein
Peter J. Carrington
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo
Silvia Domínguez
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Betina Hollstein
Affiliation:
Universität Bremen
Get access

Summary

The basic insight of social network analysis is that social structure is an emergent property of the networks of relationships in which individuals (and other social actors, such as organizations) are embedded (Simmel [1922] 1955; Radcliffe-Brown 1940). Therefore, if one wants to understand social structure, one should study social networks. While research on social networks may use quantitative or qualitative or mixed methods, social network analysis itself is fundamentally neither quantitative nor qualitative, nor a combination of the two. Rather, it is structural. That is to say, the basic interest of social network analysis is to understand social structure, by studying social networks. Observing or calculating quantitative aspects of social networks, such as the average number of individuals with whom an individual is directly connected, or qualitative aspects, such as the nature of social ties among individuals, can be useful analytic techniques, but the fundamental quest is to understand the structure of the network, which is neither a quantity nor a quality.

As it has developed, social network analysis has become increasingly mathematical: That is, it employs formalisms and analytic techniques taken from mathematics and developed further for social network analysis by mathematicians. Many people think of social network analysis as primarily a quantitative approach to social science, because they mistakenly equate “quantitative” and “mathematical.” But, as Harrison White (1963a:79) pointed out, “Mathematics has grown much ‘beyond’ quantity...,” and the branch of mathematics principally used by social network analysis – graph theory – represents structures (or the lack thereof), not quantities. The same point was made much earlier by Radcliffe-Brown (1957), in his lecture series given at the University of Chicago in 1937:

Relational analysis, even if not metrical, may be mathematical, in the sense that it will apply non-quantitative, relational mathematics. The kind of mathematics which will be required ultimately for a full development of the science of society will not be metrical, but will be that hitherto comparatively neglected branch of mathematics, the calculus of relations, which, I think, is on the whole more fundamental than quantitative mathematics.

(p. 69)
Type
Chapter
Information
Mixed Methods Social Networks Research
Design and Applications
 , pp. 35 - 64
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

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

Alderson, Arthur S. and Beckfield, Jason. 2004. “Power and position in the world city system.” American Journal of Sociology 109:811–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, James G. and Jay, Stephen J.. 1985. “Computers and clinical judgment: The role of physician networks.” Social Science and Medicine 20:969–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barabási, Albert-László. 2002. Linked: The New Science of Networks. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.Google Scholar
Barnes, John A. 1954 “Class and committees in a Norwegian island parish.” Human Relations 7:39–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Alexander. 1948. “A mathematical model for group structure.” Human Organization 7:16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, Alexander 1950. “Communication patterns in talk-oriented groups.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 22:271–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkowitz, Stephen D. 1982. An Introduction to Structural Analysis. Toronto: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Blok, Anton. 1974. The Mafia of a Sicilian Village, 1860–1960. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Boissevain, Jeremy. 1974. Friends of Friends: Networks, Manipulators, and Coalitions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bonacich, Philip. 1972. “Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 2:113–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonacich, Philip 1987. “Power and centrality: A family of measures.” American Journal of Sociology 92:1170–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragin, Charles C. 2004. “The invasion of the physicists.” Social Networks 26:285–88.Google Scholar
Boorman, Scott A. and White, Harrison C.. 1976 “Social structure from multiple networks II: Role structures.” American Journal of Sociology 81:1384–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bott, Elizabeth. 1957. Family and Social Networks. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Boyd, John P. 1969 “The algebra of group kinship.” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 6:139–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandes, Ulrik and Erlebach, Thomas, eds. Network Analysis: Methodological Foundations. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Brass, Daniel J. and Burkhardt, Marlene E.. 1993 “Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior.” Academy of Management Journal 36:441–70.Google Scholar
Breiger, Ronald L. 1976. Career attributes and network structure: A blockmodel study of a biomedical research specialty.” American Sociological Review 41:117–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breiger, Ronald L. 1981 “The social class structure of occupational mobility.” American Journal of Sociology 87:578–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breiger, Ronald L. 1982 “A structural analysis of occupational mobility.” Pp. 17–32 in Social Structure and Network Analysis, edited by Marsden, P. V. and Lin, N.. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Burris, Val. 2005. “Interlocking directorates and political cohesion among corporate elites.” American Journal of Sociology 111:249–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1982. Toward a Structural Theory of Action. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1983. Corporate Profits and Cooptation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1987. “Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence.” American Journal of Sociology 92:1287–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. 2000. “The network structure of social capital.” Research in Organizational Behavior 22:345–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. and Doreian, Patrick. 1982. “Testing a structural model of perception: Conformity and deviance with respect to journal norms in elite sociological methodology.” Quality and Quantity 16:109–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, Ronald S. and Minor, Michael J., eds. 1983. Applied Network Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Carrington, Peter J. 1981. Horizontal Co-optation through Corporate Interlocks. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Carrington, Peter J. 2011. “Crime and social network analysis.” Pp. 236–55 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Carrington, Peter J., Scott, John, and Wasserman, Stanley, eds. 2005. Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, William K. 1986. Corporate Power and Canadian Capitalism. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Crane, Diana. 1972. Invisible Colleges. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Allison, Gardner, Burleigh B., and Gardner, Mary R.. 1941. Deep South. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Davis, James A. 1963. “Structural balance, mechanical solidarity and interpersonal relations.” American Journal of Sociology 68:444–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Nooy, Wouter, Mrvar, Andrej, and Batagelj, Vladimir. 2005. Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degenne, Alain and Forsé, Michel. ([1994] 1999). Introducing Social Networks. London: Sage. Originally published as Les réseaux sociaux. Une approche structurale en sociologie. Paris: Armand Colin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, Stuart C. 1940a. “The interrelation matrix.” Sociometry 3:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, Stuart C. 1940b. “Analyses of the interrelation matrix by its surface and structure.” Sociometry 3:133–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doreian, Patrick, Batagelj, Vladimir, and Ferligoj, Anuška. 2005. Generalized Blockmodeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fararo, Thomas J. and Sunshine, Morris H.. 1964. A Study of a Biased Friendship Net. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Youth Development Center.Google Scholar
Flack, Jessica C., Girvan, Michelle, Waal, Frans B.M. de, and Krakauer, David C.. 2006. “Policing stabilizes construction of social niches in primates.” Nature 439:426–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flament, C. 1963. Applications of Graph Theory to Group Structure. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Foster, Caxton C., Rapoport, Anatol, and Orwant, Carol J.. 1963. “A study of a large sociogram II. Elimination of free parameters.” Behavioral Science 8:56–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, Ove. 2011. “Survey sampling in networks.” Pp. 389–403 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Freeman, Linton C. 1977. “A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness.” Sociometry 40:35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Linton C. 1979. “Centrality in social networks: I. Conceptual clarification.” Social Networks 1: 215–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, Linton C. 2004. The Development of Social Network Analysis. Vancouver: Empirical Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, Linton C. 2011. “The development of social network analysis – With an emphasis on recent events.” Pp. 26–39 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Friedkin, Noah E. 1984. “Structural cohesion and equivalence explanations of social homogeneity.” Sociological Methods and Research 12:235–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedkin, Noah E. 1993. “Structural bases of interpersonal influence in groups: A longitudinal case study.” American Sociological Review 58:861–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galaskiewicz, Joseph and Burt, Ronald S.. 1991. “Interorganization contagion in corporate philanthropy.” Administrative Science Quarterly 36:88–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galaskiewicz, Joseph and Krohn, Karl R.. 1984. “Positions, roles, and dependencies in a community interorganizational system.” Sociological Quarterly 25:527–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Roger V. and Fernandez, Roberto M.. 1989. “Structures of mediation: A formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks.” Sociological Methodology 19:89–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. “The strength of weak ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78:1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark 1974. Getting a Job. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Granovetter, Mark 1985. “Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91:481–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark 1992. “Problems of explanation in economic sociology.” Pp. 25–56 in Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action, edited by Nohria, N. and Eccles, R. G.. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hage, Per and Harary, Frank. 1983. Structural Models in Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harary, Frank. 1969. Graph Theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harary, Frank, Norman, Robert Z., and Cartwright, Dorwin. 1965. Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hollstein, Betina. 2011. “Qualitative approaches.” Pp. 404–16 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Homans, George C. 1950. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt, Brace.Google Scholar
Huisman, Mark and van Duijn, Marijtje. 2005. “Software for social network analysis.” Pp. 270–316 in Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, edited by Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., and Wasserman, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huisman, Mark and van Duijn, Marijtje 2011. “A reader’s guide to SNA software.” Pp. 578–600 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
INSNA. 2010. “Member listed software.” Website of the International Network for Social Network Analysis. Retrieved March 2, 2010 ().
Jennings, Helen. 1937. “Structures of leadership – Development and sphere of influence.” Sociometry 1:99–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kick, Edward, McKinney, Laura A., McDonald, Steve, and Jorgenson, Andrew. 2011. “A multiple-network analysis of the world system of nations, 1995–1999.” Pp. 311–27 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London:Sage.Google Scholar
Knoke, David. 1983. “Organization sponsorship and influence reputation of social influence associations.” Social Forces 61:1065–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knoke, David and Burt, Ronald S.. 1983. “Prominence.” Pp. 195–222 in Applied Network Analysis, edited by Burt, R. S. and Minor, M. J.. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Knoke, David and Kuklinski, James H.. 1982. Network Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Knoke, David and Laumann, Edward O.. 1982. “The social organization of national policy domains.” Pp. 255–70 in Social Structure and Network Analysis, edited by Marsden, P. V. and Lin, N.. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Knoke, David and Rogers, David L.. 1979. “A blockmodel analysis of interorganizational networks.” Sociology and Social Research 64:28–52.Google Scholar
Knoke, David and Wood, James R.. 1981. Organized for Action. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Knoke, David and Yang, Song. 2008. Network analysis. 2nd ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krackhardt, David. 1990. “Assessing the political landscape: structure, cognition, and power in organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35:342–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krackhardt, David, and Brass, Daniel J.. 1994. “Intraorganizational networks: The micro side.” Pp. 207–29 in Advances in Social Network Analysis, edited by Wasserman, S. and Galaskiewicz, J.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Krempel, Lothar. 2005. Visualisierung komplexer Strukturen. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Krempel, Lothar 2011. “Network visualization.” Pp. 558–77 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Laumann, Edward O. and Pappi, Franz. 1976. Networks of Collective Action: A Perspective on Community Influence Systems. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Leavitt, Harold J. 1951. “Some effects of communication patterns on group performance.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46:38–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leinhardt, Samuel, ed. 1977. Social Networks: A Developing Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. [1949] 1969. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Reprint. Needham, Rodney, ed. Boston: Beacon Press. Originally published as Les Structures élémentaires de la Parenté. Paris: Mouton, 1949.Google Scholar
Lin, Nan. 2001. Social Capital. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linton, Ralph. 1936. The Study of Man. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Lorrain, Francois P. and White, Harrison C.. 1971. “Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1:49–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marineau, René F. 1989. Jacob Levy Moreno, 1889–1974: Father of Psychodrama, Sociometry, and Group Psychotherapy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marsden, Peter V. 1982 “Brokerage behavior in restricted exchange networks.” Pp. 201–18 in Social Structure and Network Analysis, edited by Marsden, P. V. and Lin, N.. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Marsden, Peter V. 1983. “Restricted access in networks and models of power.” American Journal of Sociology 88:686–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, Peter V., and Lin, Nan, eds. 1982. Social Structure and Network Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Mayhew, Bruce H. and Levinger, Roger L.. 1976. “Size and the density of interaction in human aggregates.” American Journal of Sociology 82:86–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPherson, Miller, Smith-Lovin, Lynn and Cook, James M.. 2001. “Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27:415–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, J. Clyde, ed. 1969a. Social networks in urban situations. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, J. Clyde, 1969b. “The concept and use of social networks.” Pp. 1–50 in Social Networks in Urban Situations, edited by Mitchell, J. C.. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Mizruchi, Mark S. 1989. “Similarity of political behavior among large American corporations.” American Journal of Sociology 95:401–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizruchi, Mark S. 1990. “Cohesion, structural equivalence, and similarity of behavior: An approach to the study of corporate political power.” Sociological Theory 8:16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizruchi, Mark S. and Galaskiewicz, Joseph. 1994. “Networks of interorganizational relations.” Pp. 230–53 in Advances in Social Network Analysis, edited by Wasserman, S. and Galaskiewicz, J.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Moody, James and White, Douglas R.. 2003. “Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups.” American Sociological Review 68:103–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, Jacob L. 1932. Application of the Group Method to Classification. New York: National Committee on Prisons and Prison Labor.Google Scholar
Moreno, Jacob L. 1937a. “Sociometry in relation to other social sciences.” Sociometry 1: 206–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, Jacob L. 1937b. “Editorial foreword.” Sociometry 1:5–7.Google Scholar
Moreno, Jacob L. 1953. Who Shall Survive?Beacon, NY: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Morselli, Carlo. 2005. Contacts, Opportunities, and Criminal Enterprise. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morselli, Carlo 2009. Inside Criminal Networks. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullins, Nicholas C. 1973 Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Nadel, S. F. 1957. The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen & West.Google Scholar
Park, Robert E. 1955. Society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Pattison, Philippa. 1993. Algebraic Models for Social Networks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattison, Philippa 1994. “Social cognition in context: Some applications of social network analysis.” Pp. 79–109 in Advances in Social Network Analysis, edited by Wasserman, S. and Galaskiewicz, J.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pearl, Mary C. and Schulman, Steven R.. 1983. “Techniques for the analysis of social structure in animal societies.” Advances in the Study of Behavior 13:107–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1940. “On social structure.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 70:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1957. A Natural Science of Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rapoport, Anatol and Horvath, William J.. 1961. “A study of a large sociogram.” Behavioral Science 6:279–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robins, Garry. 2011. “Exponential random graph models for social networks.” Pp. 484–500 in Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roethlisberger, Fritz J. and Dickson, William J.. 1939. Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sade, Donald S. and Dow, Malcolm M.. 1994. “Primate social networks.” In Advances in Social Network Analysis, edited by Wasserman, S. and Galaskiewicz, J.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sanders, Karin and Nauta, Aukje. 2004. “Social cohesiveness and absenteeism: the relationship between characteristics of employees and short-term absenteeism within an organization.” Small Group Research 35:724–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, John. 1986. Capitalist Property and Financial Power. Brighton, UK: Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Scott, John 2000. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. 2nd ed. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Scott, John 2011. “Social physics and social networks.” Pp. 55–66 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Scott, John and Carrington, Peter J., eds. 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Shaw, Marvin E. 1954 “Group structure and the behavior of individuals in small groups.” Journal of Psychology 38:139–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, Georg. [1922] 1955. “The web of group affiliations.” Pp. 125–95 in Georg Simmel, Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations, edited by Wolff, K. H. and Bendix, R.. Reprint. New York: Free Press. Originally published as “Die Kreuzung sozialer Kreise.” In Georg Simmel, Soziologie. Munich: Duncker & Humblot, 1922.Google Scholar
Snijders, Tom A. B. 2005. “Models for longitudinal network data.” Pp. 215–47 in Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, edited by Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., and Wasserman, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snijders, Tom A. B. 2011. “Network dynamics.” Pp. 501–13 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Snyder, David and Kick, Edward L.. 1979. “Structural position in the world system and economic growth 1955–70: A multiple network analysis of transnational interactions.” American Journal of Sociology 84:1096–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, Lijun, Son, Joonmo, and Lin, Nan. 2011. “Social support.” Pp. 116–28 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Soref, Michael and Zeitlin, Maurice. 1987. “Finance capital and the internal structure of the capitalist class in the United States.” Pp. 56–84 in Intercorporate Relations: The Structural Analysis of Business, edited by Mizruchi, M. S. and Schwartz, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stephenson, Karen and Zelen, Marvin. 1989. “Rethinking centrality: Methods and examples.” Social Networks 11:1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornton, Patricia H. 1999. “The sociology of entrepreneurship.” Annual Review of Sociology 25:19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valente, Thomas W. 1995. Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google ScholarPubMed
van Duijn, Marijtje and Huisman, Mark. 2011. “Statistical methods for ties and actors.” Pp. 459–83 in The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by Scott, J. and Carrington, P. J.. London: Sage.
Warner, W. Lloyd and Lunt, Paul S.. 1941. The Social Life of a Modern Community. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wasserman, Stanley and Faust, Katherine. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, Stanley and Galaskiewicz, Joseph, eds. 1994. Advances in Social Network Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, Stanley and Robins, Garry. 2005. “An introduction to random graphs, dependence graphs, and p*.” Pp. 148–16 in Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, edited by Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., and Wasserman, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weil, André. [1949] 1969. “On the algebraic study of certain types of marriage laws (Murngin system).” Chapter 14 in Lévi-Strauss, Claude, The Elementary Structures of Kinship, rev. ed., edited by Needham, Rodney. Reprint. Boston: Beacon Press. Originally published in Claude Lévi-Strauss, Les Structures élémentaires de la Parenté. Paris: Mouton, 1949.Google Scholar
Wellman, Barry. 1979. “The community question.” American Journal of Sociology 84:1201–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellman, Barry 1988. “Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance.” Pp. 19–61 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by Wellman, B. and Berkowitz, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wellman, Barry 1999. Networks in the Global Village. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Wellman, Barry and Berkowitz, Stephen D., eds. 1988. Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wellman, Barry and Wortley, Scot. 1990. “Different strokes from different folks.” American Journal of Sociology 96:558–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellman, Barry, Carrington, Peter J., and Hall, Alan. 1988. “Networks as personal communities.” Pp. 130–84 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by Wellman, B. and Berkowitz, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wheeldon, Prudence D. 1969. “The operation of voluntary associations and personal networks in the political processes of an inter-ethnic community.” Pp. 128–80 in Social Networks in Urban Situations, edited by Mitchell, J. C.. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
White, Harrison C. 1963a. “Uses of Mathematics in Sociology.” Pp. 77–94 in Mathematics and the Social Sciences, edited by Charlesworth, J. C.. Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and Social Science.Google Scholar
White, Harrison C. 1963b. An Anatomy of Kinship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.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 81:730–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Rob and Lusseau, David. 2006. “A killer whale social network is vulnerable to targeted removals.” Biology Letters 2:497–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

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
×