canada as social structure social network analysis and...

5/9/12 Can-Net-Final-30Ap01.htm

1/25homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman/publications/cansocstr/Can-Net-Final-30Ap01.htm

Canada as Social Structure:

Social Network Analysis and Canadian Sociology

D.B. Tindall and Barry Wellman

April 27, 2001

Address for D.B. Tindall:Department of Anthropology and Sociology

University of British Columbia6303 N.W. Marine DriveVancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z1

Email: [email protected]

Address for Barry Wellman:Centre for Urban & Community Studies

University of Toronto455 Spadina Avenue Toronto, Ont. M5S 2G8

Email: [email protected]

In the Canadian Journal of Sociology, 26(3), Fall, 2001

Special issue on "The Legacy of Canadian Sociology," edited by Harry Hiller

Please direct correspondence to the first author.

CANADA AS SOCIAL STRUCTURE:

SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS AND CANADIAN SOCIOLOGY.

English Abstract:

We review the social network approach to structural analysis, give a brief historical sketch of its development in Canada and abroad,and provide an overview of Canadian contributions to this field. We review research in the following areas: personal communities,computer supported social networks, social capital (social mobility, social support, social exchange), cultural capital, structural socialpsychology (social comparison and evaluation, attitude formation), collective action (mobilization for collective action and socialmovements, interandintra movement dynamics), interorganizational and class relations, and world systems. We discuss the corecontributions of network scholars, challenges faced by network researchers, and make suggestions for future lines of inquiry. Weconclude that while social network analysis is undoubtedly an international enterprise, Canadian scholars have made corecontributions on a number of fronts over the past two decades.

French Abstract:

Nous examinons la façon d'aborder l'analyse structurelle qui fait appel au «réseau social», donnons un aperçu historique de sonévolution au Canada aussi bien qu'à l'étranger et donnons une vue d'ensemble des contributions canadiennes dans ce domaine. Nouspassons en revue la recherche dans les domaines suivants: communautés personnelles, réseaux sociaux assistés par ordinateurs,capital social (mobilité sociale, soutien social, échange social), le capital culturel, la psychologie structurelle sociale (comparaison etévaluation sociales, formation des attitudes), action collective (mobilisation en vue de l'action collective et mouvements sociaux,dynamique à l'intérieur des mouvements aussi bien qu'entre eux), relations entre les organisations et les classes, et les systèmesmondiaux. Nous discutons des principaux apports des spécialistes des réseaux, ainsi que des défis auxquels sont confrontés les



chercheurs dans ce domaine, et nous offrons des suggestions sur de futures avenues de recherche. Nous concluons que, bien quel'analyse des réseaux sociaux soit sans aucun doute une entreprise internationale, les spécialistes canadiens ont fait des apportsfondamentaux sur un certain nombre de fronts au cours des deux dernières décennies.

CANADA AS SOCIAL STRUCTURE:

SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS AND CANADIAN SOCIOLOGY.

Part 1: The Social Network Paradigm

1.1 Introduction

Although people often view the world in terms of groups (Freeman, 1992), they function in networks. In network societies:boundaries are more permeable, interactions are with diverse others, linkages switch between multiple networks, and hierarchies(when they exist) are flatter and more recursive. To be sure, social networks have always been with us, but we believe that they areincreasingly supplanting traditional groups. The change from groups to networks can be seen at many levels. Trading and politicalblocs have lost their monolithic character in the world system (Friedmann, 1991; Frank, 1998). Organizations form complexnetworks of alliance and exchange rather than cartels, and workers (especially professionals, technical workers, and managers)report to multiple peers and superiors (Richardson, 1987; Carroll and Lewis, 1991). Management by network is replacingmanagement by (twoway) matrix as well as management by hierarchal trees (Berkowitz, 1982; Wellman, 1988a, Castells, 1996).

The social network paradigm provides theoretical and methodological tools for comprehending the nature of contemporary societies.Not only was one of the first compendiums of case analyses largely produced in Canada (Wellman and Berkowitz, 1988), manyCanadian scholars have produced important analyses in the past two decades. This review of recent Canadian work is organized intothree parts. In this first part, we provide an overview of the social network approach to structural analysis, including a brief historicalsketch of its development in Canada and abroad. Part 2 focuses on interpersonal networks, and Part 3 focuses on large scalenetworks.

1.1a A Social Structural Approach: Social network analysis is the study of social structure and its effects. It conceives of socialstructure as a social network, that is a set of actors (nodes) and a set of relationships connecting pairs of these actors. The actorscan be groups, organizations or even nationstates as well as persons, and the relationships are flows of resources that reflectrelations of control, dependence, and cooperation. Network analysis's core concern is to understand how social structures facilitateand constrain opportunities, behaviours, and cognitions. Network analysts investigate patterns of relationships that connect membersof social systems, and how these patterns channel resources to specific locations in social structures. Their basic premise is thatknowledge about the structure of social relationships enriches explanations based only on knowledge about the attributes of actors.

Social network analysts reason from whole to part, from structure to relation to individual, from ties to behaviour. The paradigm isexplicitly antireductionistic, studying the parts of a system by analyzing relations among the parts. It is often multilevel, examininghow larger level organizing principles affect individual outcomes, e.g., from structure to relation to individual (Wellman and Frank,2001).

The social network paradigm provides ways for analysts to think about social relationships that do not occur in groups or in isolatedtwoperson ties (dyads). A group is really a special form of a social network that is denselyknit (most nodes are directly connected)and tightlybounded (most relations stay within the same subset of nodes). Instead of an either/or distinction between groupmembership and social isolation, researchers can bring to bear in their analysis a set of structural variables. Network analysts asksquestions such as how dense, bounded, or clustered a network is; whether it is diversified or constricted in its size andheterogeneity; how narrowly specialized or broadlybased are its relationships; how do indirect connections and positions in networksaffect behaviour; and what are the structural contexts within which relationships operate? Once this perspective is adopted, then it isclear that communities, organizations, and worldsystems are social networks.

Social network analysis contrasts with psychologistic explanations that treat individuals as independent unitsofanalysis and analyzebehaviour in terms of psychological attributes such as values and attitudes. Social network data sets often include information aboutattributes, such as age, gender, ethnicity, and beliefs. However, network analysis does not treat social systems as the sum ofindividual attributes, but links attribute data with relational and structural data. Values, attitudes and norms develop and areembedded within a structural context and it is the interplay between structure and culture that explains behavioural outcomes.Network analysts use ethnographic and statistical methods to investigate patterned differences in how people are linked to differentkinds and amounts of resources. Clustering techniques find patterns of connectivity and cleavage, diffusion analyses trace and modelthe spread of information, block models identify actors in similar structural positions, and simulations model structural dynamics.Although social structures have powerful influences on people's lives, network analysts have also focussed upon individuals as socialagents: how people actively work to construct and maintain relationships and structures that help to sustain themselves in times ofneed and facilitate the creation of new opportunities.

Many network analysts study "whole networks", describing the overall structure of one or a few specified kinds of relations linking allof the members of a population (e.g., Nazer, 2001). Yet the open nature of developed Western societies preclude studying entire,bounded populations. Hence many network analysts study samples of "egocentred networks" whose composition, structure andcontents are defined from the standpoint of the individuals at their centres.

1.1b Development Abroad and in Canada: The interdisciplinary enterprise of social network analysis has developed out ofseveral research traditions, including:



•The birth of sociometry in the 1930s.•Ethnographic efforts in the 1950s and 1960s to describe the nature of personal communities, social support, and socialmobilization.•Archival analysis to understand the structure of interorganizational and international ties.•Political economic analyses using a range of techniques to analyze social movements and world systems.

Since the 1960s, social network analysis has developed from a metaphor into a paradigm, with a common set of research questions,specialized ways of collecting data, and powerful methods for analyzing these data. Social network analysts have a 500memberinternational society (founded and based in Toronto 19761988; http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/project/INSNA/), three journals, and anannual midwinter meeting (in a warm climate insisted on by Canadian members).(1) Canadians have been leaders in developingthe network paradigm. Indeed, our account builds on an article reviewing Canadian network accomplishments through the early1980s (Richardson and Wellman, 1985) and an influential Canadianedited compendium (Wellman and Berkowitz, 1988). Althoughour article emphasizes work by Canadian sociologists, social network analysis is an international and interdisciplinary undertaking,albeit one in which Canadians have played leading roles.

Before World War II, Canadian psychologists Edward (Ned) and Helen McMurchie Bott, the founders of the University of TorontoDepartment of Psychology and the Institute for Child Study, did some of the earliest network analyses (Freeman and Wellman,1996). Helen Bott's analysis of play in a nursery school (1928) was the first to collect systematic data about personal networks anindividual's set of ties and to use a matrix to organize data about who did what with whom. The Botts' daughter, Elizabeth Bott,grew up to write (in England) the earliest wellknown network analysis, showing that interdependence or separation among husbandsand wives was more a function of the strength of their kinship networks than of their class position (1957).

The development of social network analysis within Canada can itself be partially explained in terms of networks (Wellman, 1993,2000b). There has been a "chain migration" process. Many scholars were trained by Harrison White and Charles Tilly at Harvard(Tilly also taught at the University of Toronto from 19661969), and almost all obtained jobs at the University of Toronto. Latergenerations of network analysts subsequently trained at the University of Toronto and elsewhere, and dispersed across Canada, andto some extent in the United States and France (Hiscott, 1983). Several institutions have served as important nodes in the networkanalytic network including: Laval University, University of Montreal, University of Toronto, McMaster University, Brock University,University of Calgary, University of Alberta, University of British Columbia, and the University of Victoria.

The rise of the network analytic perspective to prominence in Canadian sociology is no accident. Canadian sociologists are apt toview the social world in structural terms. Network analysis readily lends itself to intergroup, interregional, and international issuescentral to debates about Canadian society and its place in a larger global system. Its approach is wellsuited to the patterns ofdependency relations that have emerged both within Canada (e.g., Central Canada vs. the West; Brym, 1986) and between Canadaand more powerful imperial powers (e.g., first Britain and France, and then later the United States; Brym with Fox, 1989). Bycontrast, American social scientists at the imperial centre have tended to ignore the links of power that bind others to them andcelebrate others' allegiance as the result of the perceived greatness of their own society (Bush, 2001).

Structural differences between Canada and the United States have influenced values and the ideological climate of the respectivenations: American individualism and Canadian collectivism (Lipset, 1990). Themselves members of a dominated society, Canadiansare less apt to see the world as composed of voluntarilychosen, egalitarian, symmetrical ties, and are more apt to study howasymmetric ties unevenly distribute resources in complex hierarchical structures of power and dependency. This brings analyticprecision to the perennial preoccupation with relations between core and periphery (e.g., Friedmann, 1988).

Canadian network analysts have actualized this sensibility in a variety of ways, discussed in Parts 2 and 3. At the core has beentheoryconstruction and methodbuilding, briefly noted here. Lemieux (1982), Wellman (1988a, 1999b) and Erickson (2001b) havewritten theoretical treatises. François Lorrain (1995; Lorrain and White, 1971) developed the key concept of "structural equivalence":people with similar role relations to others may have similar positions in social structures even if they are not part of the samegroup. William Richards and Andrew Seary (1997, 2000) have developed eigen analysis methods for elucidating network structure.Richards has also built two computer programs for studying networks. Negopy (Richards, 1995) discovers structural properties of anetwork; Multinet (Richards, 1994), enables analysts to relate structural data to data about individual attributes (gender, age, etc.).With the abundance of ways of measuring networks available, Dean Behrens (1997a) has found that tielevel and networklevelmethods of eliciting data affect the kinds of clustered groups that will be found and the predictive ability of these clusters onbehaviour. He is also the lead author of a computer program that partitions individuals or organizations into groups based on theirrelationships with each other (Behrens et al., 1990).

Canadian network analysis also incorporates the national concern for how technology connects our dispersed, diverse land: from statesponsorship of voyageurs to the Internet. This follows the lead of Harold Innis who moved away from analyzing individualphenomena such as the fur trade (1930s) and the cod fisheries (1940) in isolation and emphasized the importance of understandingthem in the context of trade, power and communications networks (Innis, 1950). Building upon this sensibility, a political economicapproach developed, relating the emergence of local phenomena to relations of power and dependency between different geopoliticalunits and corporate structures. Important practitioners include: Marchak (1983, 1991), Clement (1975, 1977, 1983; Clement andMyles 1994), Laxer (1989, 1991), and Carroll (1986). Although such scholars rarely call themselves network analysts, their relianceon structural analysis is congruent with the social network paradigm.

1.2 Some General Principles of Social Network Analysis(2)

1.2a Structured Social Relationships are a More Powerful Source of Sociological Explanation than the PersonalAttributes of System Members: While most sociologists profess a central concern with social structure, until recently thepredominant tendency of mainstream North American sociology has been to study social phenomena as a result of the aggregation ofthe attributes of individuals. Individuals have been treated as the unit of analysis. Behaviour and attitudes have been explained as a



function of socioeconomic status, ethnic identity, age, and so on. Mainstream sociologists now take structural contexts seriously.Yet, standard methodological techniques such as the social survey, and regression analysis still treat individuals as discrete units ofanalysis. Although surveys and regression analyses are frequently used by network analysts (Müller, Wellman and Marin, 1999), theyalso use different types of techniques to describe and analyze social structure. New techniques have been developed in sampling(e.g., Erickson et al., 1981, Erickson and Nosanchuk, 1983), questionnaire construction (e.g., Marsden, 1990), structural analysis(Richards and Seary, 1997, 2000; Behrens, 1997a), and statistical analysis (e.g., White et al. 1976; Berkowitz and Fitzgerald, 1995)that allow researchers to map and interpret patterns of interrelations amongst social units.

1.2b Values, Attitudes, and Norms Emerge from Location in Structural Systems of Social Relationships: Social networkanalysts do not start with the assumption that norms, values, and attitudes are a primary force in guiding behaviour (Wellman,1988a). Nor do they assume that high levels of social solidarity and shared norms are the baseline state of society or that theabsence of these conditions is an indication of social pathology. Rather, social network analysts direct their attention toward thetypes of structures in which individuals are embedded, and argue that these are more important for understanding attitudes andrelated phenomena than are individual attributes (Erickson, 1988). For example, Baron and Tindall (1993) studied members of apunk rock subculture, many of whom lived on the streets. They found that subculture members with the highest levels of networkcentrality, were more likely to hold delinquent attitudes (attitudes advocating delinquent behaviour) than were peripheral membersof the subculture. Thus attitudes were a function of structural location.

1.2c Social Structures Determine the Operation of Dyadic Relationships: Network analysis has shown that exchanges betweentwo individuals do not operate in isolation but depend on relations with and among alters (Cook, 1982; Wellman, 1988a). Althoughnetwork analysts study dyads, triads, and other microstructural forms, a central tenet is that dyads are themselves embedded insocial structures that have consequences for interpersonal processes. For example, the nature of indirect ties (friends of friends) caninfluence the flow of information for important processes such as getting a job (Granovetter, 1973, Lin, 1999). In the area ofcommunities and social support, researchers have found that the composition of a network affects the kinds of support found in it(Wellman and Frank, 2001).

1.2d Social Systems are Networks of Networks: Social systems are networks of networks, and not necessarily groups defined apriori. Thinking of social systems as networks of network facilitates understanding different levels of phenomena. Individualsinteracting in microstructures, are embedded in mesolevel structures, which in turn are linked to macro level structures. Forexample, in the area of social movements, the rise of a social movement depends in part upon the political opportunities providedby authorities and opponents (Tilly, 1978). Within a movement, structurally more central organizations will have more influence. Atthe level of the individual, those with greater network centrality (the number of ties they have to other movement participants) aremore likely to become recruited for movement participation (Tindall, 1994). Sets of individuals with overlapping social movementorganization memberships are by definition more integrated, and their greater integration has consequences for individual leveloutcomes (such as access to diverse information). Members of dyads constituted by overlapping memberships also serve as bridgesat the meso level connecting different social movement organizations.

1.2e Social Network Analysis is Based Upon General Principles: Postmodernism (and its softer "cultural studies" version) hasbecome important in Canadian sociology. Postmodernists emphasize the social construction of structures and processes. Knowledgeis seen as being a function of the history and social location of the observer. Denying the possibility of generalizing, leads postmodernists to be sceptical about the value of systematic investigation, and about the possibility of general, objective or formalexplanation (Ritzer, 1997).

There are affinities between postmodernism and network analysis. Like postmodernists, many network analysts state looselycoupledpropositions rather than building grand theories (Wellman, 1994). The mode of postmodern discourse is congruent with the basicnetwork analytic insight that the world is composed of networks, and that hierarchicallyorganized, bounded groups are only one,somewhat rare, type of network.

By contrast to postmodernism, social network analysts adopt a realist ontology, viewing social structures as real entities (Keat andUrry, 1982). Where postmodernists provide "accounts"; network scholars provide "analyses". They see patterns of multiple ongoingrelationships as having real consequences for resource flows, and for providing opportunities and constraints for social behaviour(Wellman, 1988a, 1994). Network analysis is an inherently generalizing enterprise. Analysts want to tease out the structural patternsthat underlie the surface noise of social systems and use knowledge of these patterns to understand social interaction. They adhereto the possibility of objectivism in principle even if they recognize the challenges to this ambition in practice. They contend thatwhile social structures are cognitively interpreted and imaged by agents, they cannot be reduced to social constructions.

Social network analysis is reflexive. In accordance with mainstream science, social network analysts view knowledge as provisional,and measurement as being subject to error (Bernard et al., 1984, Killworth et al., 1990, Marsden and Campbell, 1984). They believethat social structures can be objectively mapped (in the sense that such analyses are based on measures that can beintersubjectively agreed upon). They see social structure as being related to power, but in contrast to many postmodern accounts,they see their own conceptions about structure as being more than fictional outcomes of value systems.

Part 2: Interpersonal Networks

2.1 A Group is a Type of Social Network

Many social network analyses do not treat formal group boundaries as truly social boundaries, be they departments in organizationsor neighbourhoods in cities. Instead they trace the social relationships of those they are studying, wherever these relationships goand whomever they are with. Only then do network analysts look to see if such relationships actually cross formal group boundaries.In this way, membership and boundaries become important analytic variables rather than a priori analytic constraints. The pattern ofrelationships becomes a research question rather than a given.

A group is only one kind of a social network, one whose ties are tightlybounded within a delimited set and are denselyknit (most



network members are directly linked with each other). To be sure, there are denselyknit and tightlybounded work groups andcommunity groups. Yet there are other kinds of work and community networks whose relationships are sparselyknit with only aminority of members of the workplace or community directly linked. These relationships tend to ramify out in many directions likean expanding spider's web rather than curling back on themselves into a denselyknit tangle.

2.2 Communities Are Networks

2.2a Searching for Community: scholars, the public and policymakers have traditionally seen communities as denselyknitsolidarities with tight boundaries, although there was more fragmentation, mobility and permeability in the past than many haveacknowledged (Wetherell, Plakans, and Wellman, 1994; Wellman and Wetherell, 1996). Denselyknit networks with tight boundariesmake it easy for communities to control their members and coordinate their behaviour (Tindall, Kay and Bates, 1999; Wellman,1999a).

Armed with a social network approach to posing intellectual questions, gathering information, and analyzing data, researchers are nolonger restricted to searching for communities in the solidarities of neighbourhoods and kinship groups. Some have used networktools to inform studies of small towns (Lemieux, Joubert and Fortin 1981; Gold 1985) and huntergather bands (Howell, 1988).Bodemann (1988) documented how cleavage and change in a seeminglytraditional Sicilian village has been affected by access tocapital and information from outside: links to Christian Democratic Party and more affluent returning workers from northern Europe.Similarly, Pasternak and Salaff (1993) found that ethnicity, occupation and links to the Chinese Communist Party structuredcleavages and coalitions in Inner Mongolia.

2.2b Finding Community Beyond Neighbourhoods: Others have used network tools to show that residential, kinship and coworker communities have not been lost under the impact of contemporary social transformations nor saved in villagelikeneighbourhoods. They have discovered other forms of community sparselyknit and spatiallydispersed and other forms oforganization looselycoupled and fragmented. Thus Salaff and associates (1981, 1988, 1991; Sheridan and Salaff, 1984; Pasternakand Salaff, 1993) have shown how economic development in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Inner Mongolia has made family andkinship relations more complex. More education draws social contacts away from ascriptive bases of trust (e.g., kinship) morebroadly towards buddies and colleagues who share interests and have shared economic and educational experiences. Familymembers can help lend money or provide moral support, but bettereducated Chinese who are seeking jobs, starting businesses, orcontemplating migration cannot get sufficient help from kin. Closer to home, Corman, et al. (1993) have shown how husbandwiferelations and relations among wives are intertwined with Hamilton steelworkers' communities of support (see also Luxton andCorman, 2001). In the Indian steelworking city of Bihar, Howard (1988) found complex patronclient relations as workers in smallshops are more competitive for the bosses' favours than workers in large factories.

Network analysts have usually found that community has moved out of its traditional neighbourhood base as the constraints of spaceweakened (Langlois, 1990; Wellman, 1988b, 1999b). Few sociallyclose ties are within neighbourhoods. People use telephones, theInternet, cars and planes to maintain farflung, supportive relationships (Wellman, et al., 1988; Wellman and Tindall, 1993;Wellman and Gulia, 1999a; Hampton and Wellman, 2001; Wellman, et al., 2001). These sparselyknit and looselyboundedcommunity networks are social resources that ramify across changing, fragmented communities to connect people to the diverseresources of multiple social arenas (Wellman, 1993, 1999b, 1999c). Each person is best seen as the centre of a complex, specializedpersonal community network. Rather than being locked into one group, each person has about 1,000 ties. Hence, people mustactively maintain each tie rather than relying on solidary community groups to do their maintenance work. The population of thesepersonal networks is unstable; for example, only 28% of Torontonians' sociallyclose ties remained sociallyclose a decade later(Wellman, et al., 1997). This is not to say that communities have totally cut their local roots. One research group, analyzing ruralAmerica in general and rural Louisiana in particular, found somewhat more denselyknit, homogeneous and local ties than in Toronto(Beggs, Haines and Hurlbert, 1996a; Beggs, Hurlbert and Haines, 1996b). Espinoza (1999) found that impoverished residents ofSantiago, Chile rely almost exclusively on other barrio members for material aid in getting through the day and coping with crises.Indeed, the Toronto study itself found that most interactions even if not most sociallyclose ties are with physically proximatepeople: at home, in the community and at work (Wellman, 1996).

The transformation of community from group to network has led to the household being the key operating base for accessing socialcapital in industrial countries. In married households, women have historically held the responsibility for networking with friends,relatives and neighbours, adding to domestic togetherness and female workload (Wellman, 1985, 1990; 1992a, 2001a; Wellman andWellman, 1992; Bastani, 2001). As Putnam (2000) has demonstrated, organizations and public spaces have become residual places.Private contact with familiar friends and relatives has replaced public communal gregariousness, a phenomenon exacerbated by coldCanadian winters (Michelson, 1971).

2.3 Computer Supported Social Networks

Computer networks are social networks. Although early studies treated computer networks as privileged, isolated entities (e.g.,Sproull and Kiesler, 1991), Torontobased network analysts have shown how online connectivity fits into the overall context of workand community. The data came from dispersed workgroups, homebased teleworkers, residents of a highlywired Toronto suburb("Netville"), and largescale samples of North American Internet users (Haythornthwaite and Wellman, 1998; Salaff, Wellman andDimitrova, 1998; Hampton and Wellman, 1999, 2000, 2001; Hampton, 1999, 2001; Wellman, et al., 2001; Koku, Nazer andWellman, 2001; Nazer, 2001). Addressing fears that the Internet will lead to social isolation, researchers have shown that theInternet actually adds to the total amount of communication (Gold, 1998; Wellman et al., 2001), helping to fill in the gaps betweeninperson meetings as well as to arrange such meetings. Even the allegedlyglobal Internet is, in reality, "glocalized": heavily usedfor local interactions and rooting people to their office or home computers (Hampton and Wellman, 1999, 2000b; Hampton, 2001).

Nor is Internet communication constricting. Where there had been early fears that the limited "social presence" of electroniccommunication would confine it to narrow instrumental exchanges, all sorts of things are communicated online, both at work and inthe community. Even at work, friendship as well as shared tasks drive online communication.(3)



Thus the Internet is conservative in some ways, as people appropriate the technology for their existing needs just as they have donewith the telephone. But just as the telephone led to more fragmented and geographicallydispersed personal networks (Wellman andTindall, 1993), the Internet is affecting the structure of community and society. Computer networks increase the size, variety ofinterpersonal ties, and they are especially useful for maintaining weak ties in between facetoface encounters (Wellman and Gulia,1999a). The growing reliance on personal computers, wireless computing, and mobile phones/pagers for connectivity is affording asocietal shift towards networked individualism: greater privatization of community, as contact among individuals supplants contactamong households and communal groups (Wellman, 2000a, 2001a). The Internet supports flexible work practices, as traditionalbureaucratic organizations are replaced by oftentransitory virtual organizations and networked organizations. In such work practices,people belong to multiple work teams that stretch across departments and even organizations, see teams rapidly form and dissolve,have only partial commitments to each team, and have multiple reports to/from superiors, peers, and subordinates (Wellman, 1997;Koku, Nazer, and Wellman, 2001; Nazer, 2001).

2.4 Social Capital

2.4a Social Capital is a Network Phenomenon: When people need help, they can either buy it, trade for it, steal it, get it fromgovernments and charities, or obtain it through social capital: their useful interpersonal ties with friends, relatives, neighbors andworkmates. Social capital facilitates productive and reproductive activity, just as physical capital and human capital do. Itstrengthens bonds while providing needed resources.

Although social capital analysis has become a lively international enterprise (e.g., Bourdieu 1983/1986, 1984; Portes, 1998; andPutnam, 2000), it is a sprawling term, ranging from an individualistic framework that emphasizes the advantages that individualscan gain through their personal networks to a collective perspective that emphasizes the advantages to a community of volunteerism(Coleman 1988; Paxton 1999; Putnam 2000; Lin 1999, 2001). It includes things such as community norms, group solidarity, andparticipation in voluntary and civil organizations. The looselycoupled, networked nature of contemporary societies means that socialcapital comes contingently from a variety of persons, ties and networks, rather than stably from a single, solidary group (Erickson,1996a; Wellman 1999a). At times the network, rather than the tie, is key to the provision of social capital. Large, diversifiednetworks often provide more support than small homogeneous networks (Haines and Hurlbert, 1992). For example, large, diversifiednetworks lead people to use alternative forms of health care (such as chiropractic, Alexander technique, acupuncture) in addition toofficial doctorhospital care. Network characteristics and not individual attributes such as socioeconomic status or gender, are theprominent indicators of using complementary and alternative care (Kelner, 2001; Beverly Wellman, 1995, 2001; Kelner andWellman, 1997a, 1997b, 2001).

Canadians have generally analyzed social capital with respect to resources available and mobilizable in social networks. They havewondered about the types of networks people are embedded within, and the factors that explain these structures such as initialstatuses, and education. They have analyzed how people mobilize their social capital, using relationships to obtain resources such asinformation. They see social networks as flexible, efficient, available, and custom tailored sources of social capital that are low infinancial cost. For society, social capital conveys resources, confirms identity, influences behaviour, and reinforces integrative linksbetween individuals, households and groups.

2.4b Social Capital and Mobility: Social capital facilitates and constrains social and geographical mobility. In a study of bluecollarworkers, Wilkinson and Robinson (2000) showed that ties with friends and relatives were crucial for Elliot Lake (Ontario) workers toobtain new jobs. Friends contributed much more information than relatives, but relatives provided more of "clerical help" in fillingout forms and dealing with bureaucracies. Friends, both strongly and weakly tied to the job seekers, provided more useful jobcontacts than did relatives. In a study of decidedly whitecollar workers, Kay and Hagan (1999) showed that while female lawyers inOntario participated fully in the accumulation of social capital in law firms, their efforts resulted in reduced probabilities ofpartnership. Women had their worst partnership prospects in small firms that were less apt to modify genderrelated work roles(Hagan, et al., 1991; see also Arnold and Kay, 1995). Parallelling Kay and Hagan's findings, Tindall (1995) has observed that havinggreater network range (network diversity) is more important for facilitating political participation among men than women. Thequestion remains open as regarding opportunities for women in corporate board rooms. The proportion of women directors isincreasing (Hughes, 2000), but it is not clear if their roles and power are similar to what has been obtained by male directors.

Networks are often crucial for geographical mobility. The presence of kin and friends often determined whether Hong Kong, Taiwanand Chinese immigrants made Canada their destination. Network members provided money for the move, entree to jobs and knowhow in Canada, although some affluent migrants eschewed network help to avoid incurring reciprocal obligations (Salaff, 1998;Salaff and Wong, 1994; Salaff, Fong and Wong, 1999). Once immigrants arrived, their networks helped situate them in the socialsystem, with friendship ties to higherstatus ethnic groups paying off in higher income (Ooka and Wellman, 2001).

2.4c Social Capital and Social Support: Canadians have pioneered the systematic study of social support in networks (Tilly, 1969;Shulman, 1975, 1976; Wellman, 1982, 1993). They have shown that network capital, the form of social capital that makes resourcesavailable through interpersonal ties, is widely available, usually specialized, and unevenly distributed among people, ties andnetworks. Network members provide emotional aid, material aid, information, companionship, and a sense of belonging. Their socialsupport is one of the main ways that households obtain resources to deal with daily life, seize opportunities, and reduceuncertainties.

Support is important not only in fragmented westernized societies but in centralized bureaucratic ones. Under communism and postcommunism, Bulgarians (Radoeva, 1993), Hungarians (Sik and Wellman, 1999), and Chinese (Wellman, 2001b) have reliedextensively on their interpersonal networks to obtain material resources in times of scarcity. Their networks have provided flexibleworkarounds to bureaucratic rigidities, for everyone from citydwellers obtaining food from peasant relatives, to homebuildershelping each other in construction, to jobseekers, to managers of large enterprises in dire need of goods and services.

Support from interpersonal ties is specialized: Friends and siblings provide companionship, parents and adult children provide largeservices and financial aid, and neighbours and workmates provide small services (Wellman, 1979; Wellman and Wortley, 1989,1990). Yet the composition and structure of networks also affects the provision of support (Wellman and Gulia, 1999b; Wellman and



Frank, 2001). The greater the range of a person's network the more network members and the more diverse their characteristics the greater the number and percentage of people in a network that provide support. The more denselyknit the network, the moresupportive. Thus size, diversity and coordination all are useful for getting support, and those who inhabit large networks are triplyfortunate: Not only do they have more ties and get more overall support, each member of their network is more apt to besupportive.

Behrens's (1997b) study of the supporters of people with the HIV virus showed both the specialization of ties and the interplaybetween tie and network dynamics. Ties that provided companionship and emotional support lasted longer than those that providedinstrumental support. Ties with people in denselyknit networks were more likely to persist. People with HIV constantly reexaminedtheir ties in terms of the kinds of support provided and the quality of this support. Over time, the threshold of acceptableinteractions was raised, and those ties that did not meet the current threshold were distanced and eventually terminated. Theshortest lived ties were those that drained emotional support, but at times these were so embedded in denselyknit networks thatthey persisted regardless.

Just as networks are crucially supportive in everyday life and the chronic crisis of HIV, they are important in the shortterm crisis ofa hurricane (Beggs, Haines and Hurlbert, 1996b; Beggs, Hurlbert and Haines, 1996; Hurlbert, Haines and Beggs, 2000). Thesupportive relationships forged in everyday life condition relational experiences that created expectations for help in when thehurricane came. Networks were more supportive in dealing with the hurricane when they were denselyknit and genderdiverse withrelatively high percentages of kin, men and younger adults. The characteristics of those receiving the support (such as their race)and the nature of their residential communities also affected the support received. Such networks operated in conjunction withinstitutional support. Networks and institutions complemented each other, for institutions tended to aid those whose sparselyknitand diverse networks provided less support.

For decades, methodological limitations necessitated separate analyses of ties and networks (Wellman et al., 1991). Now, multilevelanalyses of network capital integrate analyses of individuals, interpersonal ties, and personal networks into a single regressionmodel. Wellman and Frank (2001), using data from the same Toronto samples studied earlier by Wellman and his colleagues (e.g.,Wellman et al., 1988; Wellman and Wortley, 1990), have shown that while tie characteristics are key predictors of supportivebehaviour, networks also affect the supportive behaviour of ties and individuals. Ties are more supportive when they are operate innetworks heavily composed of similar ties. For example, parents and adult children are more supportive in networks containing highpercentages of parents and children. Moreover, reciprocity is more than tiedeep, for when two people are linked to others in thenetwork, they are more likely to support each other. Thus individual agency, dyadic relationships, and network properties are allimplicated in the provision of social support.

2.4d Exchange and Reciprocity: Norms and practices of social exchange and reciprocity increase the volume and predictability ofsocial capital (Deroy, 1997, 2000; Wellman, 1992b). For example, New France was built in the seventeenth century from a complexweb of exchanges between government officials and welfareminded clergy in Quebec and France (Deroy, 1996; DeroyPineau andBernard, 1998). In Toronto, exchange is both dyadic and networkbased. Not only do people exchange the same things (such as "titfortit" exchanges of emotional support) and different things ("titfortat" exchanges of services for emotional support), but theirexchanges often are indirect, passing through others in the network ("titfortatfortut" exchanges of emotional support for servicesfor companionship; Wellman, et al., 1988; Wellman and Nazer, 1995: Wellman and Frank, 2001). It is important to ascertain thebase rate for reciprocated exchanges due solely to chance, and the extent to which the provision of a supportive resource is relatedto previous exchanges (Behrens and Wellman, 2001).

New forms of exchange are developing. Communities around the world are experimenting with local money systems, such as LETS,a mutualcredit accounting money, and HOURS, paper notes representing labour hours. These are "complementary" currencies,intended to strengthen local economies without replacing the national currency. Yet tension has arisen over monetizing women'sunpaid work that is conventionally conceived of as a gift: free and abundant. Pricing such "gift" labour with conventional money hasbeen thought to draw it into the commodity realm and make it scarce. In money systems such as LETS, the unit of exchange is nonscarce, and the gendered dichotomy of commodity and gift loses its force (Raddon, 2000).

2.5 Cultural Capital

Networks can build cultural capital the range of people's useful cultural knowledge by increasing the variety of information thatpeople have (Bourdieu, 1984; Erickson, 1991, 2001a, forthcoming). Advantaged people often have better cultural resources, notbecause of social their class as such but because of their diverse networks. Erickson (1996a) asked workers in the Toronto privatesecurity industry if they knew people in each of 19 categories inspired by Wright's (1985) three major class dimensions: control ofproperty, control of organizations, and control of skill. To measure cultural capital, they were asked if they were familiar with a listof specific items within five genres (books, restaurants, art, magazines, and sports); for example, had they heard of or read each of13 books. People in higher class locations had more diverse friendship networks. Weak ties were especially important in affordinggreater access to a variety of classes. Network diversity was the only source of cultural capital advantage for all five genres studiedafter demographic and social class variables were controlled (see also Erickson, Albanese and Drakulic, 2000).

2.6 Structural Social Psychology

2.6a Social Comparison and Evaluation: Network analysis can be a common frame of reference for studies of reference groups,social comparison, class consciousness, equity and justice, and relative deprivation (Gartrell, 1987).(4) On the one hand, networkslimit social evaluation as they constrain personal reference points. Choices of whom to compare with are made from available altersand upon particular motives for comparison (e.g., learning, selfenhancement, egodefence, etc.). On the other hand, actors areactive agents: Their interactions in the process of social comparison can alter the existing network structure.

The choices of whom to make comparisons with are usually not free but are constrained by impersonally determined opportunities tointeract (Erickson, 1988; see also Erickson, 1982; Erickson and Nosanchuk 1984, 1998; Gartrell, 2001). The social structuring of



activity in "foci" such as workplaces, kinship groups, and schools leads people to develop relationships with others who aresimilar to themselves (Feld 1981, 1982)

Erickson and Nosanchuk (1984, 1998; Nosanchuk and Erickson, 1985) studied social comparisons within a bounded network, membersof an OttawaHull contract bridge club. They found that comparative stereotyping is not reduced by contact. Indeed, greaterinvolvement in the bridge subculture increased stereotyping because participants noticed the inequality of a tiny elite and ignored theequality of the much larger majority. Comparisons tended to be upward to those of cumulatively greater bridge playing ability.However, the degree of upward comparison depended upon the motive for comparison. Information seeking led to the greatestdegree of upward comparison, ego enhancement was lower, and ego defence the lowest.

Do people compare themselves to specific individuals or a symbolic group (Gartrell, 1987)? Although theories of distributive justicehave emphasized the relational nature of justice evaluations, actual research has treated justice sentiments as the aggregatedattributes of individuals (Gartrell, 1985; see Jasso, 1978, 1980; Jasso and Rossi, 1977). Yet such aggregate approaches mask thesocial relational properties of sentiments of collective justice about wage structures. Justice evaluations may be reciprocal, multiplereference points exist, and multiple justice sentiments may coexist. Gartrell (1985) has studied evaluations of the fairness of paydifferentials amongst blue collar workers in a public works department by using block models to depict the structure of justiceevaluations. He showed that blockmodelling provides a more valid representation of the data than do predictions yielded by thedominant aggregate model (proposed by Jasso, 1978, 1980).

2.6b Attitude Formation: Attitudes are "made, maintained, or modified primarily through interpersonal processes" (Erickson ,988:99). These processes have little affect among strangers, but rather, occur through social networks. Erickson has suggested howthree types of network structure can affect attitudes.

1. "Clique models stress the identification of sets of people more densely tied to one another than to other people in their network,where density is the proportion of all possible ties that actually exist" (Erickson 1988:106). Cliques engender similar attitudes.People compare most often, and such comparisons are most informative, with people to whom they are directly connected. Cliqueswith stronger and more broadlybased ("multiplex") ties should have greater consensus on attitudes.

2. Where clique analysis asks whether people belong to the same dense subgroup, structural equivalence asks the question to whatextent do people occupy similar types of positions within the network. "Structurally equivalent people tend to have similar attitudesbecause they tend to interact with the same types of actors in the same way" (Erickson 1985:110). They tend to make socialcomparisons with the same types of alters. While a pair of structural equivalent actors should have similar attitudes, such similaritydoes not depend on direct comparison with each other.

3. Spatial models draw upon the metaphor of geometry to depict individuals in social space so that spatial closeness corresponds tocloseness of relationships. The closer the relationships, the more similar the attitudes are likely to be.

In sum, social network approaches such as blockmodelling (as discussed by Erickson, and demonstrated by Gartrell) provide insightsinto social structure, and can demonstrate how similar processes operate across different types of organizations. They provide astructural alternative to the "aggregate and attribute data" analyses common to social psychology, and can provide more realisticmodels of the social referents that people draw upon in making social evaluations. Erickson has talked about how other structuralanalytic conceptual models have different implications for attitude formation (e.g., clique, blockmodel, and spatial analyses). Thereis a need to do more empirical research on these processes to see which types of models work best for predicting and explainingattitude formation.

Part 3: LargeScale Networks

3.1 Collective Action

3.1a Societal Breakdown and Collective Behaviour: Classical sociological thought about people's participation in massmovements explained such behaviour as resulting from alienation and anomie. Theorists argued industrialization and urbanization ledto a lack of primary groups and secondary associations to integrate individuals in societies (Brym, 1998). Protest behaviour was seento be a result of "contagion" and as largely being irrational in nature. In recent decades these ideas have been systematicallydebunked (Tindall, Kay, and Bates, 1999). Social movement researchers have demonstrated a rational basis for most protestbehaviour. Participants in collective actions tend to be more integrated through their personal networks and better connected tosocietal institutions than nonparticipants (Tindall, 2000b). Most scholars of social movements recognize that network ties areessential for recruitment and mobilization (Tindall 2000b). Analysts have emphasized the ways in which certain social structures actas cleavages between groups, while other social structures serve to integrate individuals within a group.

Some scholars have been concerned in recent years with bringing cultural analyses back into studies of social movements (Snow etal., 1986, Snow and Benford, 1988). Several researchers have examined the connection between structure and culture by examiningthe relation of structural position to cultural framing and collective identity. Carroll and Ratner (1996, 2000) have shown howcognitive framings of social justice issues are related to positions within intermovement networks. Activists who invoked a politicaleconomy injustice frame were more likely to be embedded in cross movement linkages than were others. Those who framedinjustice in identitypolitics terms were less embedded in crossmovement ties and were more likely to be "localists".

3.1b Connectivity and Cleavage: Brym has built on the social movement analyses of McPherson (1953), Lipset (1968), Tilly(1984), and Pinard (1973) to develop a model of third party formation (Brym 1978, 1979, 1984, Brym with Fox 1989).(5)

Canadian third parties have tended to emerge where disadvantaged groups are: bound together in dense social networks, highlysocially polarized from advantaged groups, and relatively unrepresented by existing parties. Protest activity is a function of theprotesting group's potential power. The power of a contending group depends on: (1) The group's access to material resources



(property, money, jobs), normative resources (communications media, educational institutions), and coercive resources (police,armed forces); (2) the density of social ties within the group; (3) the size of the group's membership and support base.

Position within a network affects both the real and perceived effectiveness of a social movement organization. For example, thestructural positions of 29 organizations within the Canadian feminist movement were a highly significant predictor of how outsidersperceived an organization's effectiveness (Phillips, 1991).

Although there has been a good deal of research on the mobilization of social movements themselves, there has been a dearth ofresearch on the dance between movement and countermovement. Meyer and Staggenborg (1996) have analyzed the conditionsunder which countermovements develop in relation to movements.(6) Their analysis of political opportunities suggested thattransformations in the political landscape make movement activities potentially effective for creating or resisting social change. Theyhave suggested:

• Movementcountermovement conflicts are most likely to emerge and endure in states with divided governmental authority.

• Opposing movements develop isomorphic organizational structures to the degree that they engage politically in the same venues.

• Interactions between opposing movements prevent the complete institutionalization of tactics by either side.

• Conflict between opposing movements exacerbates intramovement battles over collective action frames.

3.1c Personal Networks and Mobilization: Networks do not directly cause collective action to occur. Rather, network structurescondition the nature of interpersonal interaction, influence, and resource flows amongst potential participants. For example, severalnetworkbased processes in a British Columbia environmental movement mediated the relationship between personal networkstructure and the social movement participation of individuals: being the target of recruitment efforts, communicating frequentlywith others about movement issues, and strongly identifying with the movement (Tindall, 1994, 2000b). Under conditions of activismwith low costs and risks, weaker ties were more important than stronger ties for facilitating participation. A longitudinal study ofparticipants in this movement found that network integration, communication about movement issues, and level of movementidentification declined over time (Tindall 2000a). This was explained by position within the cycle of protest and the biographicalavailability of participants.

Parallelling Putnam's (1993, 2000) argument that participation in any voluntary organization increases political mobilization, Ericksonand Nosanchuk (1990) analyzed why associational membership politicizes bridge players. Only political discussion among theparticipants mobilized political participation. If bridge players, especially peripheral participants, had friends in the club who talkedpolitics, they did so more themselves.

Collective action is inherently problematic because decisions about individual contributions usually involve the social dilemma ofbeing forced to choose between selfinterest and collective interest. Tindall and Gartrell (1990) have bridged research on collectivedilemmas and justice theory by examining the role played in reactions to others' free riding(7). People become aware of others'contributions and outcomes as a byproduct of interaction in social networks. The volume, strength, and proximity of ties are allimportant. For example, people are more likely to cooperate in smaller groups or smaller network segments because they are lessanonymous and their behaviour is more easily monitored. The division of larger networks into smaller cliques facilitates monitoring.Without trust, cooperation among persons facing a social dilemma will deteriorate. Strong ties foster trust. Yet little has been saidabout the possible dysfunctions of network properties for social dilemmas. Trust also presents enhanced opportunities formalfeasance.

Almost all research on networks and micromobilization has focussed on progressive social movements or instances of local collectiveaction. Less is known about the structure of personal networks among those who participate in countermovements and if similarnetwork processes are at work. Theoretical predictions have argued that individuals who have ties to opposing groups will moderatetheir participation in a social movement(McAdam and Paulsen, 1993). However, a study of a community countermovementorganization in Port Alberni, B.C. that mobilized against the provincial environmental movement found that the number of outgroupties (the range of ties to environmental organizations) held by individuals was the strongest predictor of countermovement activismamongst countermovement members (Tindall and Mauboulès, 2000).

Most studies of networks and micromobilization have analyzed communication that occurs facetoface, through the post mail, orover the phone. A recent study of Internet communication and collective action in a "wired" Toronto suburb, and found that highspeed Internet communication increased the speed and effectiveness of community organization (Hampton, 2000). Members of thecommunity had greater flexibility in their communicative participation. These findings extend the observations of Tindall and Gartrell(1990) regarding networks, visibility, and free riding. Online forums provide a visibility to participation that can encourage individualcontributions, support the appearance of group solidarity, and prevent the loss of individual involvement. Yet visibility is a doubleedged sword, for while participation increases as network members witness the investment of others, it can quickly decline whennetwork visibility creates the perception that others are no longer invested in the movement.

3.2 InterOrganizational Relations

Social structure has a dual basis: Groups are linked through ties between individuals, and individuals are linked through jointmembership in groups (Breiger, 1974). By studying overlapping directorships analysts have been able to map the social structure ofCanadian corporate elites and talk about the changing nature of advanced capitalism.(8)

Canadian social scientists have focussed on the relationship between financial and nonfinancial corporations because of the centralposition of financial institutions in the economy. Directorship interlocks have received the greatest attention in the study ofincorporate relationships, in part because reliable data are easily available. Interlocks are instruments of coordination and control aswell as symbolic announcements of mutual interests. In the postwar Canadian economy, accidentally broken interlocks have beenreplaced by new interlocks in the same direction between the same pairs of firms (Richardson, 1987). Moreover, such replacementshave been related to corporate profitability.



Larger firms in Canada are socially integrated through a densely connected network of directorship interlocks (Carroll, Fox, andOrnstein 1982). This network of intercorporate ties does not appear to divide into discrete and potentially competing groups. Rather,financial firms in general and banks in particular occupy relatively central positions in the network. These corporate actors serve asarticulation points, tying together industrial and commercial companies. The structural features of the network suggest there is anindependent national bourgeoisie centred in both industry and finance and integrated with foreign capital through the boards offinancial institutions. For example, before being taken over by banks, trust companies played important roles in consolidatingCanadian enterprises (Richardson, 1988). These findings question claims made by dependency theorists about the marginal anddependent position of the Canadian corporate elite vis a vis foreign capital.

Carroll and Lewis (1991) built upon Carroll et al.'s (1982) findings, by analyzing corporate interlocks between 1976 and 1986. Theyhave argued that the early postwar period was at first an era of "polyarchic financial hegemony" (Scott, 1985, 1987) in thecorporate world, but there has been a countervailing shift towards a holding system of familycontrolled enterprise groups coexistingwith widelyheld financial institutions at the centre of Canadian finance capital. Carroll and Alexander's (1999) analysis of networksof interlocking directorships in Canada and Australia in 1992 has shown how historical factors have led to Canada having a less statecentric organization of class power than Australia (Carroll and Alexander, 1999). The persistent strong core of interlocked indigenousCanadian capitalists suggests that before the free trade agreements, globalization had not dissolved the strong network thatconnected all Canadian capitalists and their organizations.

There are two types of interlocking corporate board ties: directional (an officer of one company on the board of another) andnondirectional. Although both types of interlocks integrate organizations into larger systems (Berkowitz and Fitzgerald, 1995), onlydirectional interlocks coopt or control (Richardson, 1987). By contrast, nondirectional ties link specific pairs of corporations largelyby accident. Only identical ties (ties that are replaced between pairs of corporations in the same direction) have been related tocorporate profits and reflect an interorganizational relationship. Other types of interlocks (nondirectional or accidental) have beenunrelated to corporate profitability and fill an integrative function that transcended specific corporate interests. For example,stronglytied alliances in the semiconductor industry aid corporate performance in stable business environments. However, when thefirms operated in more uncertain environments, weak ties were more useful, presumably because of their greater range, flexibility,and ease of entry and exit (Rowley, Behrens and Krackhardt, 2000).

Enterprise groups are more integrated than interlocking corporations. They are sets of firms organized together under a singlecontrolling agency and functioning as one unit of capital (Berkowitz, et al., 1979). Enterprise groups became more predominant inthe 1970s with a concomitant concentration in corporate control. Berkowitz and Fitzgerald (1995) found an almost fivefoldconsolidation of the number of economic decisionmaking units within the Canadian economy between 1972 and 1987, simultaneouswith a substantial decrease in the number of singlefirm and multiplefirm enterprises.

Despite the integrated strength of Canadian corporations, by the mid1980s, crossborder relationships had led to strong connectionswith American corporations and a reduced interest by Canadian financial and industrial elites in opposing free trade (Richardson,1992). Richardson has argued that free trade was part of a larger devolution of power from the central Canadian government to theprovinces and corporations.

3.3 World Systems

Canadian "world systems" analysts have added considerations of power and structure to the oftennebulous debates aboutglobalization. Andre Gunder Frank (Frank and Gillis, 1996) argued for a 5,000 year "Kondratieff" world economic cycle rather thanthe standard 500 year cycle. From this longterm perspective, he argued that an Asiancentred analysis is the key to thedevelopment of the current worldsystem (1998). In his view, the decline of the East occurred about 1800, when European statesused American gold and African slaves to buy their way into the already flourishing Asian system.

In recent years the globalization of capital has increased "the transnational character of enterprisetoenterprise relations, and[changed] the relations of these to states"(Friedmann, 1988, p. 320). The structure of the world food order (from production andfinance through trade and consumption) has emphasized national farm programs. This placed the United States at the centre and"allowed international power to take the unusual form of subsidized exports of surplus commodities" (Friedmann, 1991, p. 511).

4. Taking Stock and Moving Forward

4.1 Taking Stock

This article has overviewed the social network approach to structural analysis and provided a brief historical sketch of itsdevelopment in Canada and abroad. While social network analysis is undoubtedly an international enterprise, Canadian scholars havemade core contributions on a number of fronts, and have been at the forefront since the start. Indeed, we have been impressed withhow a broad a spectrum of network analytic work we have been able to present through our review of Canadian research. In thepast, social network analysis has been criticized for being preoccupied with narrow technical and methodological issues (Collins,1988; Maryanski, 1991; Emirbayer and Goodwin, 1994) to the detriment of developing theoretical contributions, or substantiveanalyses. Our review of Canadian contributions shows that this view is inaccurate for Canadian social network research has clearlyflourished in diverse fields. Over the last 30 years social network analysis has become a flourishing enterprise, with its own theory,methods, and findings. Research by Canadian scholars has contributed to the following network analytic insights:

Communities flourish but no longer live in neighbourhoods.Computer networks are social networks with relations online embedded in overall social networks.Social capital is a network phenomenon; people get different kinds of support from different types of ties rather than a widerange of support from each tie.Emergent properties are alive and well. The nature of networks as well as of specific ties affects the amount and kind ofsupport that people get.Social capital is used for both job and geographical mobility.Reciprocity maintains ties, and through indirect exchanges, integrates social systems.Networks supply cultural capital. Such cultural capital affects the type of ties people have and can use for social capital.



Networks structure cognition and social comparisons.Networks recruit people to collective action and social movements.Within social movements, networks structure coalitions and cleavages.Networks structure interorganizational relations.The position of an organization in a network can affect its comparative advantage.Corporations form coalitions through interlocking relationships. These often consolidate into larger enterprises.The world system is a social network where major units are nation states and transnational corporations.

In our discussion below, we underscore some of the central contributions of Canadian social network scholars. We also identify someavenues for future research, and several of the challenges that exit for social network analysts.

4.2 Core Contributions of Social Network Scholarship

We have outlined the breadth of contributions provided by network scholars in Canada. We feel it would useful in our discussion toidentify some core contributions. For several reasons, the contributions of network scholars in Canada to sociology is not the same asthe contributions of network scholars to Canadian sociology. Much social network research has focussed on general principles (theprovision of social support, structural influences on social evaluation processes, micromobilization for collective action) rather thanidiographic explanations specific to Canadian society. Some network research has been more influential within Canadian sociology(research with an idiographic focus published in Canadian journals), while other work has contributed to advances in the disciplinemore generally (research with a nomothetic focus published in international journals). Arguably the scholars who have had thehighest visibility within Canadian sociology are those who have examined network relations amongst corporations (and othereconomic formations) through analysis of corporate interlock data (such as Carroll, Ornstein, Fox, Richardson, and Berkowitz). Whilethis work draws upon some general methodological and conceptual principles, it has been primarily interested in describing thestructure of Canadian capitalism and its similarity or dissimilarity from capitalism in other nation states. The work of these scholarshas been well published in Canadian journals such as the CJS and CRSA. Scholars who have looked at more general processes (suchas networks and social support) have been more likely to publish in international journals, and have perhaps had relatively lessvisibility within Canada. For this reason we would like to emphasize the contributions of these latter scholars.

4.3 Some Core Network Analytic Contributions to Social Capital Research

There has been much recent interest within sociology in the concept of social capital. In general, social capital can be thought of as agood that accumulates (and dissipates) as a result of repeated social interactions among members of a social network. In otherwords, repeated social interactions lead to the development of various types of social structures. These social structures facilitatescertain types of actions (e.g., networks with closure facilitate monitoring of behaviour). A parallel concept (to social capital), "socialresources", developed independently within the social network literature (Lin, 1999). In early work in the social capital tradition(such as Coleman's) there was some confusion between the features of the social structure and the actual resources that areaccessed. According to different scholars, social capital included things such as "community norms", "group solidarity", and"participation in voluntary and civil organizations". Network researchers draw a distinction between the properties of social structuresand the resources that are accessed through such structures (Lin, 1999),(9) often using the term social capital to refer to thelatter.(10) Several lines of social network informed social capital research have thrived in Canada. These revolve around "communityand social support" and "class and cultural capital".

4.3a Community and Social Support:(11) Barry Wellman (and his colleagues) has made several core contributions to socialnetwork scholarship(12). A substantive contribution exists in the area of community sociology. Classic definitions of communityinvolved three conceptual dimensions: 1. shared geography; 2. collective identity; and 3. structural integration. While these threedimensions of community are interrelated, they can be analytically separated and treated as semiautonomous indicators of"community". Wellman has argued that studies of urban communities have tended to focus on the first two dimensions (primarilythe geographic dimension). Drawing upon network theory and empirical data collected over time in Toronto he has argued that ifanalysts focus on the third dimension (structural integration) by employing social network analysis, then it becomes apparent thanmany people live in thriving personal communities, albeit communities that are geographically scattered. Indeed, communities havetended to become more geographically dispersed as transportation and communication technologies have pushed back the constraintsof geography. Personal networks have become fragmented, specialized, and complex. These insights have been far reaching inhelping scholars to reevaluate the state of communities in modern, industrialized, urban societies. However, as a good deal of thisresearch has taken place in Toronto, there needs to be replication of this work in a variety of other Canadian urban centres.

Another major contribution by Wellman and his colleagues is in the area of social support. As Wellman's research has demonstrated,social support is not primarily a dyadic activity, but rather a social network activity where support flows asymmetrically among pairsof individuals, and where those seeking support obtain different types of support from different sources within their personalnetwork. A recent related contribution involves the development of multilevel analysis, where individual, tie, and social networkeffects upon the provision of social support can be unpackaged. This research has reoriented the focus of social support researchfrom dyads to networks. One conclusion of this research is that the composition of a network affects the types of support that can beaccessed. Great strides have been made in this area, but more research is needed on what specific kinds of network characteristicsare important for particular types of social support.

As noted above, in his work on social networks and communities Wellman extended the concept of community to includegeographically dispersed communities that are linked together through personal network ties. Recently, Wellman has furthered thisline of inquiry by turning his attention to computer mediated social networks. Wellman is one of the first sociologists to take "virtualcommunity" seriously, and has explored the ways in which virtual communities differ from other types of communities. Somefindings are counterintuitive, at least with regards to media discourse about cyberspace. For example, like other technologies suchas the telephone, communication over the Internet has tended to supplement rather than supplant other forms of communication. AsWellman has noted, this is an area that has been understudied by sociologists. There are tremendous social network researchopportunities in the areas of cybercommunity and cybersociety.



4.3b Social Structure, Social Capital and Cultural Capital: As noted earlier, Bonnie Erickson has made several contributions tothe social capital/social resources literature(13). Of particular significance, in examining the intersections of social networks, class,and cultural capital, Erickson has:

• shown how social networks are related to class

• shown how social networks are related to culture

• distinguished different types of cultural capital and their relevance to class relations

• discussed why social networks are related to certain types of cultural capital

In developing relational class measures of network contacts, Erickson's work on the intersection between social stratification andnetwork structure has moved beyond American models that use SES measures. Along these lines she has refined questionnairemeasures of classbased network diversity. Erickson's work has focussed on the security industry in Toronto. As network structuresmay vary with economic structures, future research needs to examine networks, class, and cultural capital in other industries andregions.

Recent years have marked a productive period for social capital researchers, and have led to a variety of differentconceptualizations. It is unclear how broad the scope of phenomena is that should be entailed by the concept of social capital. Apartial list of social capital goods includes: trust, information, mobilization, socialization, sanctioning, and social mobility. Similarly,the network structures that are thought to be related to social capital entail a variety of things: network closure, tie strength, rolerelation, extensity of ties, network range, multiplexity, structural holes, and clustering. Social network analysis provides analyticalleverage for understanding the relationship between social structure and social capital. Future research should focus on what types ofsocial capital tend to be associated with particular network structures. Social capital outcomes can be good for some and bad forothers. Thus there is also a need for research to examine social bads associated with social capital. For example, while somescholars would see network structures that promote monitoring and sanctioning to enforce this normative behaviour as a social good these outcomes can also see as instances of increased social control that constrain opportunities for individual expression.

4.4 Moving Forward

We have focussed primarily on the achievements of social network scholars, and in the past several decades these have been many.However, as in all fields there are challenges to address.

1. More work needs to be done verifying if the phenomena empirically associated with network structures are the cause or the effect(Richardson, 1985; Carroll and Ratner, 1996; Tindall, 2000b). For example, people who are more integrated through their social tiesinto a social movement will become more involved in the movement, but at the same time people who are highly active willdevelop a greater number of ties with fellow activists. Corporate profitability may be a result of the direction of interlocking ties, ormay lead to the creation of such ties. Highly central social movement organizations may be more successful in developing masterframes, or social movement organizations who successfully adopt and promote key master frames may become more central in thenetwork. The position of an individual within a social network may be associated with the strength of her attitude due to theinfluence of others, or the strength of her attitude may lead her to seek out a particular position within the network and thus becomean opinion leader. Multilevel analysis (Wellman and Frank, 2001) provides a partial solution to this problem at least tounderstanding the relative importance of different structural properties by teasing out emergent structural properties from tieprocesses and individual agency.

2. Network structures are unlikely to be simply either causes or effects, but to be linked to other phenomena in intricate feedbackloops for actors are both constrained by structure and affect structure to their advantage. Network models and explanations need toaccount for such reciprocal influences.

3. Related to the problem of whether network structures are the cause or effect of various social process, a fundamental challenge ofsocial network analysis is distinguishing between patterned social ties and the resources that flow through such ties. This challengecan be addressed in a number of ways: 1) showing how network based relations at one point in time, are related to resource flowsat a subsequent point in time, 2) clearly distinguishing between the type of social relation under investigation (eg. friendship vs.acquaintanceship tie) and the resource (e.g. information). More conceptual precision is needed especially in research on socialcapital.

4. One way to gain leverage on the above issues is to conduct longitudinal research. Longitudinal research has been conducted in thecorporate interlock area (presumably because of the easy availability of data) but is less common in other areas: Wellman et al.'sstudy of personal networks (1997) and Tindall's study of a social movement (2000a) are the only two Canadian studies with whichwe are familiar.

5. Related to the questions about causality raised above, network researchers need to go beyond documenting correlationalrelationships between network characteristics and particular social outcomes. For example, most scholars of social movementsrecognize that network ties are essential for recruitment and mobilization. However, the proposed mechanisms for these processesare many and varied. Some proposed mechanisms include: 1) communication, 2) recruitment appeals, 3) identification; 4) socialinfluence, 5) incentives and sanctions, 6) social support, 7) socialization, 8) knowledge and information, 9) personal efficacy, 10)norms, 11) subjective interest, 12) beliefs about others' willingness to contribute, and 13) trust. In much of the work on networksand mobilization for collective action the "mechanism" is not empirically measured, but speculated upon. In a variety of areasnetwork scholars have provided convincing evidence that network relations are empirically associated with social outcomes (like therelationship between network ties and recruitment/mobilization). Future research needs to move beyond empirical associations andinvestigate network related mechanisms.

The work of the past two decades suggests that network researchers will make advances in understanding the causal directionalinfluence of network mechanisms and that this will be accomplished by the increased collection and analysis of longitudinal data. Thecomplexly structural nature of Canadian society and the vigour of current work and mentorship suggests that Canadians will be



continue to be central in this work.

References

Arnold, Bruce L., and Fiona M. Kay

1995 "Social Capital, Violations of Trust and the Vulnerability of Isolates: The Social Organization of Law Practice and ProfessionalSelfRegulation." International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 23:321346.

Bastani, Susan

2001 "Middle Class Community in Iran." Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.

Baron, Stephen W., and David B. Tindall

1993 "Network Structure and Delinquent Attitudes within a Juvenile Gang." Social Networks, 15:255273.

Beggs, John, Valerie Haines and Jeanne Hurlbert

1996a "Revisiting the RuralUrban Contrast: Personal Networks in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Settings." Rural Sociology 61(2): 30625.

1996b "Situational Contingencies Surrounding the Receipt of Informal Support. Social Forces 75 (Sept.): 20122.

Beggs, John, Jeanne Hurlbert and Valerie Haines

1996 "Community Attachment in a Rural Setting: A Refinement and Empirical Test of the Systemic Model." Rural Sociology 61 (3):40726.

Behrens, Dean

1997a "An Empirical Examination of Structural Grouping Algorithms." Working Paper. Department of Sociology, University ofToronto.

1997b "SelfIsolation and The Structuring of Support: The Relationship between Stress and Network Evolution." Doctoral dissertation,Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.

Behrens, Dean, Robert Olszewski and Kathleen Carley

1990 " Direct Approach to Equivalences." Working Paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.

Behrens, Dean and Barry Wellman

2001 "The Real World of Reciprocity: Evidence from Toronto." Working Paper, Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.

Berkowitz, S.D.

1982 An Introduction to Structural Analysis: The Network Approach to Social Research. Toronto: Butterworth.

1988 "Markets and MarketAreas: Some Preliminary Formulations." Pp. 261303, in Social Structures: A Network Approach, editedby B. Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Berkowitz, S.D., Peter Carrington, Yehudi Kotowitz, and Leonard Waverman

1979 "The Determination of Enterprise Groupings Through Combined Ownership and Directorship Ties." Social Networks, 1:391413.

Berkowitz, S.D. and William Fitzgerald.

1995 "Corporate Control and Enterprise Structure in the Canadian Economy: 19721987." Social Networks 17 (2): 111128.

Bernard, H. Russell, Peter Killworth, David Kronenfeld and Lee Sailer

1984 "The Problem of Informant Accuracy: The Validity of Retrospective Data." Annual Review of Anthropology 13:495517.

Bodemann, Y. Michal

1988 "Relations of Production and Class Rule: The Hidden Basis of PatronClientage." Pp. 198220 in Social Structures: A NetworkApproach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bott, Elizabeth

1957 Family and Social Network. London: Tavistock

Bott, Helen McMurchie

1928 "Observations of Play Activities in a Nursery School." Genetic Psychology Monographs 4: 4488.

Bourdieu, Pierre

1983/1986

"The Forms of Capital." Pp. 24158 in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by JG Richardson.



Westport, CT: Greenwood.

1984 Distinction, translated by Richard Nice. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Breiger, Ronald L.

1974 "The Duality of Persons and Groups." Social Forces, 53:18190.

Brym, Robert J.

1978 "Regional Social Structure and Agrarian Radicalism in Canada: Alberta, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick." Canadian Reviewof Sociology and Anthropology, 15(3):339351.

1979 "Political Conservatism in Atlantic Canada." Pp. 5979 in Underdevelopment and Social Movements in Atlantic Canada, editedby Robert J. Brym and R. James Sacouman. Toronto: New Hogtown Press.

1984 "Social Movements and Third Parties." Pp. 2949 in S. Berkowitz (editor), Models and Myths in Canadian Sociology. Toronto:Butterworth Canada.

1987 "The Political Sociology of Intellectuals: A Critique and a Proposal". Pp. 199209 in, The Role of Intellectuals in LiberalDemocracies: Political Influences and Social Involvement, Edited by A Gagnon. New York: Praeger.

1988 "Structural Location and Ideological Divergence: Jewish Marxist Intellectuals in TurnoftheCentury Russia." Pp. 35979 inSocial Structures: A Network Approach, edited by B. Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1998 "Social Movements and Politics." Pp. 461485 in New Society: Sociology for the 21st Century. Second Edition., edited byRobert J. Brym. Toronto: Harcourt Brace Canada.

Brym, Robert J. (Ed.)

1985 The Structure of the Canadian Capitalist Class. Toronto: Garamond Press.

1986 Regionalism in Canada. Toronto: Irwin.

Brym, Robert J. with Bonnie J. Fox

1989 From Culture to Power: The Sociology of English Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Brym, Robert J., Michael Gillespie, and A. Ronald Gillis

1985 "Anomie, Opportunity, and the Density of Ethnic Ties: Another View of Jewish Outmarriage in Canada." Canadian Review ofSociology and Anthropology, 22(1):10212.

Brym, Robert J., Michael Gillespie, and Rhonda Lenton

1989 "Class Power, Class Mobilization, and Class Voting." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 14(1):2544.

Bush, George W.

2001 Achievement the Establishment Way: A Story of Sponsored and Contest Mobility. Austin, TX: Chad Press.

Carrington, Peter

1981 "Horizontal CoOptation Through Corporate Interlocks." Occasional Paper No.1, Structural Analysis Programme, Department ofSociology, University of Toronto.

Carroll, William K.

1984 "The Individual, Class, and Corporate Power In Canada." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 9:24568.

1986 Corporate Power and Canadian Capitalism. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

1989 "Neoliberalism and the Restructuring of Canadian Finance Capital." Capital and Class, 38:81112.

Carroll, William K. and Malcolm Alexander

1999 "Finance Capital and Capitalist Class Integration in the 1990s: Networks of Interlocking Directorships in Canada and Australia."Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 36(3):331354.

Carroll, William K., John Fox, and Michael D. Ornstein

1982 "The Network of Directorate Links Among the Largest Canadian Firms." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology,19:4469.

Carroll, William K. and Scott Lewis

1991 "Restructuring Finance Capital: Changes in the Canadian Corporate Network 19761986." Sociology, 25(3):491510.

Carroll William K. and Robert S. Ratner

1996 "Master Framing and CrossMovement Networking in Contemporary Social Movements." The Sociological Quarterly, 37(4): 601



625.

2000 "Coalition Politics: The B.C. Action Canada Network." Paper presented at the International Sunbelt Social Network Conference,Vancouver, B.C., April.

Castells, Manuel.

1996 The Rise of the Network Society. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Clement, Wallace

1975 The Canadian Corporate Elite: An Analysis of Economic Power. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.

1977 Continental Corporate Power: Economic Elite Linkages Between Canada and the United States. Toronto: McClelland andStewart.

1983 Class, Power, and Property. Toronto: Methuen.

Clement, Wallace and John Myles

1994 Relations of Ruling: Class and Gender in Postindustrial Societies. Montreal: McGillQueens Press.

Coleman, James

1988 "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology, 94: S95S121.

1990 Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Collins, Randall

1988 Theoretical Sociology. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers.

Cook, Karen. S.

1982 "Network Structures from an Exchange Perspective." In Peter V. Marsden and Nan Lin, eds., Social Structure and NetworkAnalysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Corman, June, Meg Luxton, David W. Livingstone and Wally Seccombe

1993 Recasting Steel Labour: The Stelco Story. Halifax, NS: Fernwood.

Deroy, Françoise

1996 "Réseaux Sociaux et Mobilisation de Ressources: Analyse Sociologue du Dessein de Marie Guyart." Doctoral dissertation,Department of Sociology, University of Montreal.

1997 "Typologie des Réseaux Sociaux et Autoformation." Première Recontre Mondiale sur l'Autoformation, Montreal, Sept.

2000 "Petite Histoire de la Notion de Réseau." Revue Education Permanente, 144: 2133.

DeroyPineau, Françoise and Paul Bernard

2001 "Projet Mystique, Réseaux Sociaux et Mobilisation des Ressources: Le Passage en NouvelleFrance de Marie de l'Incarnation en1639." Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions: forthcoming.

Emirbayer, Mustafa and Jeff Goodwin

1994 "Network Analysis, Culture, and the Problem of Agency." American Journal of Sociology, 99(6):141154.

Erickson, Bonnie

1981 "Secret Societies and Social Structure." Social Forces, 60(1):188210.

1982 "Networks, Ideologies, and Belief Systems." Pp. 15972, In Social Structure and Network Analysis, edited by Peter Marsden andNan Lin. Beverly Hills: Sage.

1988 "The Relational Basis of Attitudes." Pp. 99121 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by B. Wellman and S.D.Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1991 "What is Good Taste Good For?" Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 28(2):25578.

1996a "Culture, Class, and Connections." American Journal of Sociology, 102(1):217251.

1996b "The Structure of Ignorance." Connections, 19(1)2838.

2001a "Good Networks and Good Jobs: The Value of Social Capital to Employers and Employees." Forthcoming in Social Capital:Theory and Research. Edited by Nan Lin, Ron Burt and Karen Cook. Chicago: Aldine De Gruyter.

2001b "Social Networks." Forthcoming in The Blackwell Companion to Sociology, edited by Judith Blau. Malden, MA: Blackwell

Forthcoming



"Networks, Culture and Class." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Erickson, Bonnie, Patricia Albanese and Slobodan Drakulic

2000 "Gender on the Jagged Edge: The Security Industry, Its Clients, and the Reproduction and Revision of Gender." Work andOccupation 27 (August): 294318.

Erickson, Bonnie, and T.A. Nosanchuk

1983 "Applied Network Sampling." Social Networks, 5(4):367382.

1984 "The Allocation of Esteem and Disesteem: A Test of Goode's Theory." American Sociological Review, 49:648658.

1998 "Contact and Stereotyping in a Voluntary Association." Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique 60: 533

1990 "How An Apolitical Association Politicizes." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27 (2): 20619.

Erickson, Bonnie, T.A. Nosanchuk, and Edward Lee

1981 "Network Sampling in Practice: Some Second Steps." Social Networks, 3:12736.

Erickson, Bonnie H., T.A. Nosanchuk, and Liviana Mostacci, and Christina Ford Dalrymple.

1978 "The Flow of Crisis Information as a Probe of Work Relations." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 3:7187

Espinoza, Vicente

1999 "Social Networks among the Urban Poor: Inequality and Integration in a Latin American City." Pp. 14784 in Networks in theGlobal Village, edited by Barry Wellman. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Feld, Scott L.

1981 "The Focussed Organization of Social Ties." American Journal of Sociology, 86:101535.

1982 "Social Structural Determinants of Similarity Among Associates." American Sociological Review, 47:797801.

Frank, Andre Gunder

1998 ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Frank, Andre Gunder and Barry Gills (eds.)

1996 The World System: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousand? London: Routledge.

Freeman, Linton

1992 "The Sociological Concept of Group: An Empirical Test of Two Models." American Journal of Sociology, 98:15266.

Freeman, Linton and Barry Wellman.

1996 "A Note on the Ancestral Toronto Home of Social Network Analysis." Connections 18 (November): 1519.

Friedmann, Harriet

1988 "Form and Substance in the Analysis of the World Economy." Pp. 30426 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited byBarry Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1991 "New Wines, New Bottles: The Regulation of Capital on a World Scale." Studies in Political Economy 36 (Fall): 942

Garton, Laura, Caroline Haythornthwaite and Barry Wellman

1997 "Studying Online Social Networks." Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 3 (June):http://www.usc.edu/dept/annenberg/vol3/issue1/garton.html

Garton, Laura and Barry Wellman

1995 "The Social Uses of Electronic Mail in Organizations: A Review of the Research." Communication Yearbook 18: 43453.

Gartrell, David

1982 "On the Visibility of Wage Referents." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 7:11743.

1985 "Relational and Distributional Models of Collective Justice Sentiments." Social Forces, 64:6483.

1987 "Network Approaches to Social Evaluation." Annual Review of Sociology, 13:4966.

2001 "The Embeddedness of Social Comparison." Forthcoming in Ian Walker and Heather Smith (editors), Relative Deprivation:Specification, Development, and Integration. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gartrell, C. David, and Bernard E. Paille

1997 "Wage Cuts and the Fairness of Pay in a WorkerOwned Plywood Cooperative." Social Psychology Quarterly, 60(2):103117.



Gartrell, C. David and David B. Tindall

1990 "Fairness and the Free Rider Problem in Worker Cooperatives." Pp. 97105 in June Bold and Murray Fulton (eds.), Cooperative Development. Ottawa, Ont.: Canadian Association for Studies in Cooperation.

Gold, Gerald

1985 St. Pascal. Waveland Press.

1998 "Virtual Community and Collective Action: A Canadian Case." Presented at Canadian Association for Social and CulturalAnthropology, Toronto, May.

Granovetter, Mark

1973 "The Strength of Weak Ties." American Journal of Sociology, 78:136080.

Hagan, John, Marjorie Zatz, Bruce Arnold and Fiona Kay

1991 "Cultural Capital, Gender, and the Structural Transformation of Legal Practice." Law and Society Review 25 (2): 23962.

Haines, Valerie A. and Jeanne S. Hurlbert

1992 "Network Range and Health." Journal of Health and Social Behavior 33: 25466.

Haines, Valerie A., Jeanne S. Hurlbert and John J. Beggs

1996 "Exploring the Determinants of Support Provision: Provider Characteristics, Personal Networks, Community Contexts, andSupport Following Life Events." Journal of Health and Social Behavior: 252261.

Hampton, Keith N.

1999 "ComputerAssisted Interviewing: The Design and Application of Survey Software to the Wired Suburb Project." Bulletin deMethodologie Sociologique 62: 4968.

2000 "Grieving for a Lost Network: Collective Action in a Wired Suburb." Unpublished paper.

2001 "Living the Wired Life in the Wired Suburb: Netville, Glocalization and Civic Society." Doctoral dissertation, Department ofSociology, University of Toronto.

Hampton, Keith and Barry Wellman

1999 "Netville Online and Offline: Observing and Surveying a Wired Suburb." American Behavioral Scientist 43, 3 (Nov): 47592.

2000 "Examining Community in the Digital Neighborhood: Early Results from Canada's Wired Suburb." Pp. 47592 in Digital Cities:Technologies, Experiences and Future Perspectives, edited by Toru Ishida and Katherine Isbister. Berlin: SpringerVerlag.

2001 "Capitalizing on the Net: Getting Support on the Internet from Distant Ties." American Behavioral Scientist 44: forthcoming.

Haythornthwaite, Caroline and Barry Wellman

1998 "Work, Friendship and Media Use for Information Exchange in a Networked Organization."Journal of the American Society forInformation Science 49, 12 (Oct.): 11011114.

Haythornthwaite, Caroline, Barry Wellman and Marilyn Mantei.

1995 "Work Relationships and Media Use: A Social Network Analysis." Group Decision and Negotiation 4 (May): 193211.

Hiscott, Robert D.

1983 "Patterns of Academic Employment: A Blockmodel Analysis." Working paper, Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.

Howard, Leslie

1988 "Work and Community in Industrializing India." Pp. 18597 in Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Howell, Nancy

1988 "Understanding Simple Structure: Kinship Units and Ties." Pp. 6282 in Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

1990 Surviving Fieldwork: A Report of the Advisory Panel on Health and Safety in Fieldwork. Washington: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

Hughes, Karen

2000 "Women and Corporate Directorships in Canada: Trends and Issues." Discussion Paper No. CPRN/01, Canadian Policy ResearchNetworks, Ottawa.

Hurlbert, Jeanne S., Valerie A. Haines and John J. Beggs



2000 "Core Networks and Tie Activation: What Kinds of Routine Networks Allocate Resources in Nonroutine Situations?" AmericanSociological Review 65: 598618.

Innis, Harold

1930 The Fur Trade in Canada. New Haven: Yale University Press.

1940 The Cod Fisheries: The History of an International Economy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

1950 Empire and Communication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Jasso, G.

1978 "On the Justice of Earnings: A New Specification of the Justice Evaluation Function." American Journal of Sociology, 83:13981419.

1980 "A New Theory of Distributive Justice." American Sociological Review, 45:332.

Jasso, G. and P. Rossi

1977 "Distributive Justice and Earned Income." American Sociological Review, 42:63951.

Kay, Fiona M. and John Hagan

1999 "Cultivating Clients in the Competition for Partnership: Gender and the Organizational Restructuring of Law Firms." Law andSociety Review, 33(3):517555.

Keat, Russell and John Urry

1982 Social Theory As Science. 2d ed. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Kelner, Merrijoy

2001 "The Therapeutic Relationship Under Fire" Pp. 7998 in Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Challenge and Change, editedby Merrijoy Kelner, Beverly Wellman, Bernice Pescosolido and Mike Saks. Reading, UK: Harwood.

Kelner, Merrijoy and Beverly Wellman

1997a Health Care and Consumer Choice: Medical and Alternative Therapies." Social Science and Medicine 45 (2): 21012.

1997b "Who Seeks Alternative Health Care? A Profile of the Users of Five Modes of Treatment." Journal of Alternative andComplementary Medicine 3 (2): 12740.

2001 "Introduction" Pp. 124 in Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Challenge and Change, edited by Merrijoy Kelner, BeverlyWellman, Bernice Pescosolido and Mike Saks. Reading, UK: Harwood.

Killworth, Peter, Eugene Johnsen, H. Russell Bernard, Gene A. Shelley and Christopher McCarthy

1990 "Estimating the Size of Personal Networks." Social Networks, 12:289312.

Koku, Emmanuel. Nancy Nazer and Barry Wellman

2001 "Netting Scholars: Online and Offline." American Behavioral Scientist 44, 10 (June): in press.

Krohn, Roger

2000 "Toward a New Sociology of Economics." Working Paper, Department of Sociology, McGill University.

Langlois, Simon.

1990 "L'Avènement de la Société de Consommation: Un Tournant dans l'Histoire de la Famille." Quebec, Canada: Report to InstitutQuébécois de Recherche sur la Culture.

Laxer, Gordon

1989 Open for Business: The Roots of Foreign Ownership in Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

1991 Perspectives on Canadian Economic Development: Class, Staples, Gender, and Elites. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Lemieux, Vincent.

1982 Réseaux et Appareils: Logique des Systèmes et Langage des Graphes. St. Hyancithe, Que: Edisem.

Lemieux, Vincent, Pierre Joubert and René Fortin

1981 Réseaux et Appareils: Une Recherche dans l'Islet. Quebec, Que: Laboratory of Political and Administrative Studies, Departmentof Political Science, Laval University.

Lin, Nan

1999 "Social Networks and Status Attainment." Annual Review of Sociology, 25:46787.



2001 Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lipset, Seymour Martin

1968 Agrarian Socialism: The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation in Saskatchewan. Berkeley: University of California Press.

1990 Continental Divide: The Values and Institutions of the United States and Canada. New York: Routledge.

Lorrain, François

1995 "Le Géométrie des Rapports Sociaux". Lecture, University of Montreal, March.

Lorrain, François, and Harrison C. White

1971 "Structural Equivalence of Individuals in Social Networks." Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1: 4980.

Luxton, Meg and June Corman

2001 Getting By in Hard Times. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

MacPherson, C.B.

1953 Democracy in Alberta. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Marchak, M. Patricia

1983 Green Gold: The Forest Industry in British Columbia. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

1991 The Integrated Circus: The New Right and the Restructuring of Global Markets. Montreal: McGillQueens University Press.

Marsden, Peter

1990 "Network Data and Measurement." Annual Review of Sociology, 16:43563.

Marsden, Peter and Karen Campbell

1984 "Measuring Tie Strength." Social Forces, 63:482501.

Maryanski, Alexandra

1991 "Network Analysis." Pp. 540572 in Jonathan H. Turner, The Structure of Sociological Theory. Belmont, CA: WadsworthPublishing Company.

McAdam, Doug and Ronnelle Paulsen

1993 "Specifying the Relationship between Social Ties and Activism." American Journal of Sociology, 99, 64067.

Meyer, David S. and Suzanne Staggenborg

1996 "Movements, Countermovements, and the Structure of Political Opportunity." American Journal of Sociology, 101(6):162860.

Michelson, William

1971 "Some Like it Hot: Social Participation and Environmental Use as Functions of the Season." American Journal of Sociology 76:10721083.

Müller, Christoph, Wellman, Barry and Marin, Alexandra

1999 "How to Use SPSS to Study EgoCentered Networks." Bulletin de Methode Sociologique 69 (October): 83100.

Nazer, Nancy

2001 "Operating Virtually with a Hierarchical Framework: How a Virtual Organization Really Works." Doctoral dissertation,Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.

Nosanchuk, T.A. and Bonnie Erickson

1985 "How High is Up? Calibrating Social Comparison in the Real World." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48:62434.

Nozawa, Shinji

1996 "Aspects Spatiaux De Liens Personnels Dans le Japon Moderne." Bulletin de la Societe Neuchateloise de Geographie 40: 8397.

Ooka, Emi and Barry Wellman

2001 "Does Social Capital Pay Off More Within or Between Ethnic Groups? Analyzing Job Searchers in Five Toronto Ethnic Groups"Forthcoming in Inside the Mosaic, edited by Eric Fong. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ornstein, Michael

1976 "The Boards and Executives of the Largest Corporations: Size, Composition, and Interlocks." Canadian Journal of Sociology,1(4):41137.



1984 "Interlocking Directorates in Canada: Intercorporate or Class Alliance." Administrative Science Quarterly, 29:21031.

1989 "The Social Organization of the Canadian Capitalist Class in Comparative Perspective." Canadian Review of Sociology andAnthropology, 26:15177.

1998 "Three Decades of Elite Research in Canada: John Porter's Unfulfilled Legacy." Pp. 14579 in The Vertical Mosaic Revisited.Richard HelmesHayes and James Curtis (eds.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Otani, Shinsuke

1999 "Personal Community Networks in Contemporary Japan." Pp. 27989 in Networks in the Global Village, edited by BarryWellman. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Pasternak, Burton and Janet Salaff

1993 Cowboys and Cultivators: The Chinese of Inner Mongolia. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Paxton, Pamela

1999 "Is Social Capital Declining in the United States? A Multiple Indicator Assessment." American Journal of Sociology, 105(1):88127.

Phillips, Susan D.

1991 "Meaning and Structure in Social Movements: Mapping the Network of National Canadian Women's Organizations." CanadianJournal of Political Science, 24: 75582.

Pinard, Maurice

1971 The Rise of a Third Party: A Study of Crisis in Politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.

Portes, Alejandro

1998 "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology." Annual Review of Sociology, 22:124

Putnam, Robert D.

1993 Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

2000 Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Raddon, MaryBeth

2000 "Currency of Friendship: Community Currencies as Gift Economies." Working Paper, Department of Sociology, University ofToronto, November.

Radoeva, Detelina

1993 "Networks of Informal Exchange in StateSocialist Societies." International Sunbelt Social Network Conference, Tampa,February.

Richards, William

1994 Multinet. Burnaby, B.C.: Department of Communication Studies, Simon Fraser University.

1995 Negopy 4.30 Manual and User's Guide. Burnaby, BC: Department of Communication Studies, Simon Fraser University.

Richards, William and Andrew Seary

1997 "Convergence of Communication Networks." Advances in Communication Science 15: 14189.

2000 "Eigen Analysis of Networks" Journal of Social Structure, Sept: http://www.library.cmu.edu:7850/JoSS/richards/

Richardson, R. J.

1982 "Merchants Against Industry: An Empirical Study of the Canadian Debate." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 7:279295.

1985 "A StructuralRational Theory of the Functions of Directorship Interlocks Between Financial and Nonfinancial Corporations." Pp.10316 in The Structure of the Canadian Capitalists Class, edited by Robert J. Brym. Toronto: Garamond Press.

1987 "Directorship Interlocks and Corporate Profitability." Administrative Science Quarterly, 32:367386.

1988 "'A Sacred Trust': The Trust Industry and Canadian Economic Structure." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 25(1): 122.

1992 "Free Trade: Why Did It Happen?" Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 29 (3): 30728.

Richardson, R.J., Bonnie Erickson, and T.A. Nosanchuk

1979 "Community Size, Network Structure and the Flow of Information." Canadian Journal of Sociology, 4:37992.

Richardson, R.J., and Barry Wellman



1985 "Structural Analysis." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 22(5):77193.

Ritzer, George

1997 Postmodern Social Theory. New York: McGrawHill.

Rowley, Timothy, Dean Behrens and David Krackhardt

2000 "Redundant Governance Mechanisms: An Examination of Structural and Relational Embeddedness in the Steel andSemiconductor Industries." Strategic Management Journal 21: 36986

Salaff, Janet

1981 Working Daughters of Hong Kong: Filial Piety or Power in the Family? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1988 State and Family in Singapore: Restructuring a Developing Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

1991 "The Chinese Connection: Management Control Structures and the Search for Labour in Taiwan. Part 1: Small Firms." InTaiwan: Management, Economy, Society, Culture and History. Edited by E.K.Y. Chen, Jack Williams and Wilson Wong. Hong Kong:University of Hong Kong Centre for Asian Studies.

1998 "The Gendered Social Organization of Migration and Work." Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 6 (34): 31742.

Salaff, Janet, Eric Fong and Wong Siulun

1999 "Using Social Networks to Exit Hong Kong." Pp.299 329 in Networks in the Global Village, edited by Barry Wellman. Boulder,CO: Westview Press

Salaff, Janet and Wong Siulun

1994 "Exiting Hong Kong: Social Class Experiences and the Adjustment to 1997." Pp. 176233 in Emigrating From Hong Kong, editedby Ronald Skeldon. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.

Salaff, Janet, Barry Wellman and Dimitrina Dimitrova

1998 "There is a Time and Place for Teleworking." Pp. 1131 in Teleworking Environments: Proceedings of the Third InternationalWorkshop on Telework, Sept 14, edited by Reima Suomi, Paul Jackson, Laura Hollmén and Mats Aspnäs. Turku, Finland: TurkuCenter for Computer Science General Publication No. 8.

Scott, John

1985 Corporations, Class and Capitalism. Second Edition. London: Hutchinson.

1987 "Intercorporate Structures in Western Europe: A Comparative Historical Analysis." In Intercorporate Relations, edited by MarkMizruchi and Michael Schwartz. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sheridan, Mary and Janet W. Salaff

1984. Lives, Chinese Working Women. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Shulman, Norman

1975 "LifeCycle Variations in Patterns of Close Relationships." Journal of Marriage and the Family 37: 81321.

1976 Network Analysis: A New Addition to an Old Bag of Tricks." Acta Sociologica 19: 30723.

Sik, Endre and Barry Wellman

1999 "Network Capital in Communist and PostCommunist Societies." Pp. 22554 in Networks in the Global Village, edited by BarryWellman. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Snow, David A. and Robert D. Benford

1988 "Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization." International Social Movement Research, 1:197217.

Snow, David A., E. Burke Rochford, Jr., Steven K. Worden and Robert D. Benford

1986 "Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation." American Sociological Review, 51:46481.

Sproull, L.S. and S.B. Kiesler

1991 Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Boston, M.A.: MIT Press.

Staggenborg, Suzanne

1986 "Coalition Work in the ProChoice Movement: Organizational and Environmental Opportunities and Obstacles." Social Problems,33(5):374390.

1988 "The Consequences of Professionalization and Formalization in the ProChoice Movement." American Sociological Review,55:585605.



1989a "Organizational and Environmental Influences on the Development of the ProChoice Movement." Social Forces, 68(1)20440.

1989b "Stability and Innovation in the Women's Movement: A Comparison of Two Movement Organizations." Social Problems,36(1):7592

1991 The ProChoice Movement: Organization and Activism in the Abortion Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press.

1998 "Social Movement Communities and Cycles of Protest: The Emergence and Maintenance of a Local Women's Movement." SocialProblems, 45(2):180204.

Tilly, Charles

1969 "Community, City, Urbanization." Working Paper, Dept. of Sociology, University of Toronto.

1978 From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.

1984 Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Tindall, David B.

1994 "Collective Action in the Rainforest: Personal Networks, Identity, and Participation in the Vancouver Island WildernessPreservation Movement." University of Toronto, Department of Sociology: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

1995 "Gender, Social Resources, and Political Participation: The Consequences of Differential Social Resources for Environmentalistsin British Columbia." Paper presented at the International Conference on Social Networks. London, England, July 6th10th.

2000a "Personal Networks, Identification and Movement Participation Over Time: A Study of the British Columbia WildernessPreservation Movement". Paper presented at "Social Movement Analysis: The Network Perspective" conference, Ross Priory, LochLomond, Scotland, June.

2000b "Social Networks, Identification, and Participation in an Environmental Movement: Lowmedium Cost Activism Within TheBritish Columbia Wilderness Preservation Movement." Unpublished paper.

Tindall, David B. and C. David Gartrell

1990 "Networks, Social Evaluation, and Collective Dilemmas." Advances in Group Processes, 7:105128.

Tindall, David B, Fiona M. Kay, and Kerri Lynn Bates

1999 "Urban and Community Studies." Pages 603624 in Lester R. Kurtz (Editor), Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, and Conflict,Volume 3. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Tindall, David B. and Cline Mauboulès

2000 "The Social Bases of Participation in a CounterNewSocial Movement." Paper presented at the International Sunbelt SocialNetwork Conference, Vancouver, BC, April.

Wellman, Barry

1979 "The Community Question." American Journal of Sociology, 84:120131.

1982 "Studying Personal Communities." Pp. 6180 in, Social Networks and Social Structure, edited by Peter Marsden and Nan Lin.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

1985 "Domestic Work, Paid Work and Net Work." Pp. 15991 in Understanding Personal Relationships, edited by Steve Duck andDaniel Perlman. London: Sage

1988a "Structural Analysis: From Metaphor and Method to Theory and Substance." Pp. 1961 in Social Structures: A NetworkApproach, edited by B. Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1988b The Community Question Reevaluated." Pp. 81107 in Power, Community and the City, edited by Michael Peter Smith. NewBrunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

1990 "The Place of Kinfolk in Personal Community Networks." Marriage and Family Review 15 (12): 195228

1992a "Men in Networks: Private Community, Domestic Friendships." Pp. 74114 in Men's Friendships, edited by Peter Nardi.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

1992b Which Ties Provide What Kinds of Support?" Advances in Group Processes 9: 20735.

1993 "An Egocentric Network Tale." Social Networks 15 (December): 42336.

1994 "I was a Teenage Network Analyst: The Route from The Bronx to the Information Highway." Connections 17, 2 (October): 2845.

1996 "Are Personal Communities Local? A Dumptarian Reconsideration." Social Networks 18, 3 (Sept.): 34754.

1997 "An Electronic Group is Virtually a Social Network." Pp. 179205 in Culture of the Internet, edited by Sara Kiesler. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.



1998 "Doing It Ourselves: The SPSS Manual as Sociology's Most Influential Recent Book." Pp. 7178 in Required Reading:Sociology's Most Influential Books, edited by Dan Clawson. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.

1999a "From Little Boxes to LooselyBounded Networks: The Privatization and Domestication of Community." Pp. 94114 inSociology for the Twentyfirst Century: Continuities and Cutting Edges, edited by Janet AbuLughod. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress

1999b "The Network Community: An Introduction to Networks in the Global Village." Pp. 147 in Networks in the Global Village,edited by Barry Wellman. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

2000a "Changing Connectivity: A Future History of Y2.03K." Sociological Research Online 4, 4 (Feb):http://www.socresonline.org.uk/4/wellman.html

2000b "Networking Network Analysts: How INSNA (the International Network for Social Network Analysis) Came to Be." Connections23, 1 (Summer): 2031.

2001a "Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Networked Individualism." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research25 (2001): forthcoming.

2001b "Networking Guanxi." Forthcoming in Guanxi Rules, edited by Thomas Gould, Douglas Guthrie and David Wank. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Wellman, Barry (ed.)

1999c Networks in the Global Village. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Wellman, Barry and S.D. Berkowitz (eds.)

1988 Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wellman, Barry, Peter Carrington and Alan Hall

1988 Networks as Personal Communities." Pp. 13084 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by Barry Wellman and S.D.Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wellman, Barry and Kenneth Frank

2001 "Network Capital in a MultiLevel World: Getting Support from Personal Communities." Forthcoming in Social Capital: Theoryand Research, edited by Nan Lin, Ron Burt and Karen Cook. Chicago: Aldine De Gruyter.

Wellman, Barry, Ove Frank, Vicente Espinoza, Staffan Lundquist and Craig Wilson

1991 "Integrating Individual, Relational and Structural Analysis". Social Networks 13 (Sept.): 22350.

Wellman, Barry and Milena Gulia

1999a "Net Surfers Don't Ride Alone: Virtual Communities as Communities." Pp. 33167 in Networks in the Global Village, edited byBarry Wellman. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

1999b "A Network is More Than the Sum of its Ties: The Network Basis of Social Support." Pp. 83118 in Networks in the GlobalVillage, edited by Barry Wellman. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Wellman, Barry and Nancy Nazer

1995 "Does What Goes Around Come Around?" International Sunbelt Social Network Conference London, July.

Wellman, Barry and Stephanie Potter

1999 "The Elements of Personal Community Networks." Pp. 33166 in Networks in the Global Village, edited by Barry Wellman.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Wellman, Barry, Anabel Quan, James Witte and Keith Hampton

2001 "Does the Internet Increase, Decrease, or Supplement Social Capital? Social Networks, Participation, and CommunityCommitment." American Behavioral Scientist 45: forthcoming.

Wellman, Barry, Janet Salaff, Dimitrina Dimitrova, Laura Garton, Milena Gulia and Caroline Haythornthwaite.

1996 "Computer Networks as Social Networks: Virtual Community, Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Telework." AnnualReview of Sociology 22: 21338.

Wellman, Barry and David Tindall

1993 "How Telephone Networks Connect Social Networks." Progress in Communication Science 12: 6394.

Wellman, Barry and Charles Wetherell

1996 "Social Network Analysis of Historical Communities: Some Questions from the Present to the Past." History of the Family 1, 1:97121.

Wellman, Barry, Renita Wong, David Tindall and Nancy Nazer



1997 "A Decade of Network Change: Turnover, Mobility and Stability". Social Networks 19 (January): 2750

Wellman, Barry and Scot Wortley

1989 "Brothers' Keepers: Situating Kinship Relations in Broader Networks of Social Support." Sociological Perspectives 32 (3): 273306.

1990 "Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support." American Journal of Sociology 96 (Nov.): 55888.

Wellman, Beverly

1995 "Lay Referral Networks: Using Conventional Medicine and Alternative Therapies for Low Back Pain." Sociology of Health Care12: 21338.

2001 "Partners in Illness: Who Helps When You are Sick?" in Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Challenge and Change,edited by Merrijoy Kelner, Beverly Wellman, Mike Saks and Bernice Pescosolido. Reading, UK: Harwood.

Wellman, Beverly and Barry Wellman

1992 "Domestic Affairs and Network Relations". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 9 (Aug.): 385409.

Wetherell, Charles, Andrejs Plakans and Barry Wellman

1994 "Social Networks, Kinship and Community in Eastern Europe." Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 24:63963.

White, Harrison, Scott Boorman, and Ronald Breiger

1976 "Social Structure from Multiple Networks: I. Blockmodels of Roles and Positions." American Journal of Sociology, 81:73080.

Wilkinson, Derek and David Robinson

2000 "What's Friendship Got to Do with It? Looking for Jobs from Elliot Lake." Presented to the annual meeting of the AmericanSociological Association, Washington, August.

Wortley, N. Scot

1996 "Social Networks, Social Support and Substance Abuse: Testing Social Ability and Social Disability Theories of Deviance."Doctoral dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Toronto.

Wright, Eric Olin

1985 Classes. London: Verso Editions.

Authors' Biographies

D.B. Tindall is an Assistant Professor in the Departments of Anthropology/Sociology and Forest Resources Management at theUniversity of British Columbia. His ongoing research is in the fields of social network analysis, social movements, and environmentalsociology. He has a particular interest in the role of social networks in micromobilization for collective action and social movements.

Barry Wellman has been a Canadian and Torontonian by choice since 1967. At the University of Toronto he founded the InternationalNetwork for Social Network Analysis in 1976 and led this scholarly association until 1988. Concurrently, he edited and publishedINSNA's informal journal Connections, where many of the scholars discussed in this article served as Associate and Assistant Editors.At the Department of Sociology, University of Toronto, Wellman founded and headed the Structural Analysis Programme, a virtualresearch institute of faculty and graduate students applying social network analysis to a variety of substantive, theoretical andsubstantive issues. Wellman (with S.D. Berkowitz) edited Social Structures: A Network Approach (2d ed., JAI Press, 1997),Networks in the Global Village (Westview Press, 1999), and with Caroline Haythornthwaite The Internet in Everyday Life (Blackwell,2002).

1. Moreover there has been a proliferation of network analyses throughout sociology. One of the anonymous reviewers of this articlecommented that the leading journal in sociology seems to publish one or more articles having to do with some aspect of socialnetwork analysis in virtually every issue .

2. These points are discussed more fully in Wellman and Berkowitz (1988).

3. In addition to the aforementioned studies, see Garton and Wellman, 1995; Wellman, et al., 1996; Garton,Haythornthwaite, and Wellman, 1997; Haythornthwaite, Wellman and Mantei 1995; Haythornthwaite, Wellman andGarton 1997.

4. See also: Gartrell 1982, 1985, 2001; Gartrell and Tindall, 1990; Gartrell and Paille, 1997.

5. Brym has also contributed to structural analytic understandings of other phenomena such as: intellectuals (Brym,1987, 1988), class voting (Brym, 1986; Brym, Gillespie, and Lenton, 1989), and political economy (Brym, 1985, 1986).

6. Staggenborg has also written extensively about coalition dynamics within the prochoice movement; see



Staggenborg 1986, 1988, 1989a, 1989b, 1991, 1998.

7. A variety of studies have examined the implications of network structure for the flow of information; for someCanadian studies see Erickson et al, 1978; Richardson et al. 1979; Erickson 1981, 1996.

8. E.g., Carrington, 1981; Carroll 1984, 1986, 1989; Carroll and Alexander 1999; Carroll, Fox, and Ornstein, 1982; Carrolland Lewis 1991; Ornstein, 1976, 1984, 1989, 1998; Berkowitz et al. 1979; Berkowitz, 1988; Berkowitz and Fitzgerald,1995; Richardson 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1992.

9. Lin (1999) emphasizes the instrumental uses of such resources. In further elucidating the distinction between socialresources and social capital, Lin distinguishes between 1) access to social capital (the types of networks people areembedded within, and the factors that explain these structures such as initial statuses, and education) and 2)mobilization of social capital (the use of contacts to obtain resources such as information).

10. Some researchers have started to use the term "network capital" to refer to the social network structures thatprovide social capital (e.g., Wellman and Frank, 2001).

11. This section was written by the first author, not by Barry Wellman.

12. In addition to those discussed below, he fostered the development of social network analysis in Canada through hiscontributions to INSNA, paradigmatic writings on social network analysis, and mentorship of social network scholars.

13. Bonnie Erickson has been influential in several areas of network research including sampling methods, socialpsychology, and social capital.

canada as social structure social network analysis and...

Documents