***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****

Dear Mario & SOCNET Members,

I am writing in response to your announced book. After reading the
first chapter my impression was enhanced ? it is a thoughtful and
provocative manner of discussing the significance of social networks.
Although my modest opinion might not be relevant to the SNA
discussions, I have decided to reply as a beginner in the field. This
situation has been challenging and has led to my developing some
arguments concerning social networks:

1. The argument of qualitative methods in the social networks research
I have mainly been collecting quantitative data for my PhD research in
the neighbourhood (Villa Alvalade) in Lisbon, I have simultaneously
developed a qualitative analysis and have encountered a gap regarding
literature and methods supporting the relevance of social clubs in
cities as a source of community building. Does anyone have significant
literature/research on this field? How does this ethnographic research
matter to the development of a more qualitative perspective in SNA (as
the Manchester University did)?

2. The argument of weak ties significance in the urban context
Granovetter and Gans (even though he is not a social analyst) had
divergent perspectives on the power of social networks in deprived
urban areas. How does Small?s perspective fill the gap regarding this
relevant argument?

3. The Latinos? argument
As a Portuguese and SNA researcher I have been collecting and
analysing (informally) Latinos specificities concerning networks
(bonding, bridging, homophily, embeddedness,?), as a result I have
some questions: How does Latinos? differ, or not, from the others,
regarding social networks? How do Small case studies? enrich this
eventual SNA perspective?

4. The Social Policy argument
Despite the tremendous SNA developments in last years - publications
and developments in social networks - cutting across boundaries of
traditional disciplines. How do Small?s, Briggs? (and probably others)
perspectives matter towards cutting across Social Policy boundaries?
How do Social Policy & Welfare State matter to the social analyst?s
research?

5. I would like to apologize for the ones who eventually feel their
time has consumed on these arguments, but the extraordinary
sociological imagination of SNA field and this timely book have made
me reflect and put forward these considerations.

I thank you in advance.

Best regards,
Romana Xerez


Citando Mario Small <[log in to unmask]>:

> ***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> A book that may be of interest was just released. A critique of social
> capital theory, it examines how the institutional conditions of routine
> organizations affect network formation.
>
>
> Unanticipated Gains: Origins of Network Inequality in Everyday Life
> Mario Luis Small, 2009
> Oxford University Press
> http://tinyurl.com/laomzd
>
>
> From the publisher:
> Social capital theorists have shown that some people do better than
> others in part because they enjoy larger, more supportive, or otherwise
> more useful networks. But why do some people have better networks than
> others? *Unanticipated Gains* argues that the practice and structure of
> the churches, colleges, firms, gyms, childcare centers, and schools in
> which people happen to participate routinely matter more than their
> deliberate "networking."
>
> Exploring the experiences of New York City mothers whose children were
> enrolled in childcare centers, this book examines why a great deal of
> these mothers, after enrolling their children, dramatically expanded
> both the size and usefulness of their personal networks. Whether, how,
> and how much the mother's networks were altered--and how useful these
> networks were--depended on the apparently trivial, but remarkably
> consequential, practices and regulations of the centers. The structure
> of parent-teacher organizations, the frequency of fieldtrips, and the
> rules regarding drop-off and pick-up times all affected the mothers'
> networks. Relying on scores of in-depth interviews with mothers,
> quantitative data on both mothers and centers, and detailed case studies
> of other routine organizations, Small shows that how much people gain
> from their connections depends substantially on institutional conditions
> they often do not control, and through everyday processes they may not
> even be aware of.
>
> Emphasizing not the connections that people make, but the context in
> which they are made, *Unanticipated Gains* presents a major new
> perspective on social capital and on the mechanisms producing social
> inequality.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________
> Mario Luis Small
> Associate Professor of Sociology and the College
> University of Chicago
> 1126 East 59th Street
> Chicago, IL 60637
>
> http://home.uchicago.edu/~mariosmall
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
> network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
> an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
> UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

_____________________________________________________________________
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.