Print

Print


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

In the piece below I suggest that SNA can be a bridge between quant and qual
by giving quant more insight into relations and qual more insight into full
social context.  There's more to it than that.  Social network section
starts on page 26 of the web document.

                Frank, K. A. (1998). "The Social Context of Schooling:
Quantitative Methods" Review of Research in Education, Vol, 23, chapter 5,
pages 171-216.

It's on my web site:
http://www.msu.edu/~kenfrank/



-----Original Message-----
From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Michael Johnston
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 7:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ASA specialty areas?

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

Hi, Barry,

Yes, I agree with you that SNA is more than quantitative methods.  But,
for some reason qualitative work does not get much recognition/support.
About a year ago, I posted an email asking soc-netters to recommend
qualitative social network research published after 1990.  Only one of
the four recommendations concerned an article based solely on
ethnographic methods:
Dominguez and Watkins.  2003.  Creating Networks for Survival and
Mobility: Social Capital Among African-American and Latin-American
Low-Income Mothers.  Social Problems 50(1):111-135.  (A couple cited
ethnographic work that helped to flesh out network analysis.)

To bolster your claim that SNA deserves to be treated as a theoretical
orientation, not as a quantitative approach, can you recommend some
post-1990 ethnographic research that advances the field of social
network analysis?

Hoping you're able to recommend several good pieces,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Barry Wellman
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 6:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ASA specialty areas?

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

News comes slowly to the north country. We have to give those dog teams
a
rest break.
So I belatedly am reading the Sept-Oct issue of the AmSocAssoc Footnotes
in which 77 speciality areas are laid out.
The good news is that Social Networks is one of them.
The puzzling to bad news is that it is list under the Broad category of
Quantitative Approaches (along with math soc, quant soc, stats and
micro-computing).
There are 2 reasons why this is bad:
1. Many social network analysts are qualitative, either ethnographic or
archival.
2. We've spent 30+ years developing social network analysis as a
fundamentally different theoretical approach. Methods are important to
SNA, but only in service of theory.
It would make more sense to me to put SNA in with the broad category of
Theory, Knowledge, Science.
Lynn Smith-Lovin and Jim Ennis were on the ASA committee that did this,
so
perhaps they can explain.

 Barry
 _____________________________________________________________________

  Barry Wellman         Professor of Sociology        NetLab Director
  wellman at chass.utoronto.ca  http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

  Centre for Urban & Community Studies          University of Toronto
  455 Spadina Avenue    Toronto Canada M5S 2G8    fax:+1-416-978-7162
             To network is to live; to live is to network
 _____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________
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.


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Francis Johnston [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 11:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Qualitative SNA

Dear Soc-netters,

Are you able to recommend recent (1990 or after) published ethnographic
research that has a social network orientation?

I recognize that qualitative social network research has a long history
[for example:
Rothlesberger and Dickson "Management and the Worker" 1939 was based on
an observer who recorded conversations; Whyte Street Corner Society 1943
was fieldwork; also the work by Bott and Sampson is quite famous.]  Are
there recent works that stand out in the same way?

Best regards,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Social Networks Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Johnson, Jeffrey C
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:11 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: evaluating networks qualitatively

I think getting caught up in the quant/qual distinction is not going to
resolve any of the problems of interest.  It is really a matter of doing
a thorough job initially of a series of qualitative in-depth interviews
to identify what is needed and relevant to the problem.  Such
qualitative interviews can then lead to valid and relevant systematic
network questions that can be reliably compared across all actors
(without the inherent problems in open ended qualitative approaches of
"just because it wasn't mentioned by an informant in an in-depth
interview does not necessarily mean it is not important to them").  We
had a problem like this in attempting to study informal social roles in
networks (see  J.C. Johnson, J. Boster, and L. Palinkas. "Social Roles
and the Evolution of Networks in Isolated and Extreme Environments". The
Journal of Mathematical Sociology  Volume 27/Numbers2-3, (2003): pp.
89-122).  The use of in-depth interviews to identify these roles is
described in:

 J.C. Johnson and S. Weller. Elicitation Techniques in Interviewing.
(2002) In Handbook of  Interview Research (J. Gubrium and J. Holstein,
eds.), pp 491-514,  Sage:Newbury Park.


-----Original Message-----
From: Graeme Larsen [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 11:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: evaluating networks qualitatively
Catherine and other SOCNET colleagues,

You ask what kind of attributes i am interested in.  Well i am unsure.
Whiltst i accept 'how' communicaiton occurs in an informal network can
be mapped and positions quantified by SNA, the only explaination for
'why' they occur this way is based around the SNA quantitative
data/paradigm.  Regarding innovations, there are many attributes related
to the innovation, cost, advantages, drivers behind it etc etc (Rogers
early stuff) and the type of social system it is diffused into, interest
rates, political system, level of competition etc etc.  This is before
we start to consider elements concerning the actors, education, value
systems, individual drivers etc.  If occurs to me that there are all
these complementary 'softer' issues that actually contribute to the
network which i want to include.

I hope you can make sense of this.

Kind regards
Graeme Larsen
Doctoral Researcher
University of Reading

_____________________________________________________________________
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.

_____________________________________________________________________
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.