Print

Print


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

HI Bruce,

you have your finger on an area sna has yet to grapple adequately with.
Firstly a distinction, and this comes from the world of sociometry and not
sna.

Sociometric literature defines positive, negative and neutral tele in
relationships, as being attracted to (positive), rejecting (negative) and
'no sense of' as neutral tele - the two way emotional flow of feeling
between people. It is often clear (to me) that sna relationships are not the
telic relationships envisioned and described by Jacob Moreno. His work and
that of psychodramatists, sociometrists, and group workers 'measure'
emotionally significant relationships. So positive relationships described
'companions' on specific criteria. And of course, positive, neutral and
negative are not linear measures, they desribe emotional connections between
people which when mapped, display the psychosocial networks.

This means A may be positive to B, but B may be negative to A. (put simply:
A wants to marry, date or have a cup of tea, with B, but B does not choose A
for any of these interactions). You get the picture. SNA has yet to find a
way to map these attractions and pulls away between people and in my
opinion, tends to overvalue positive connections.

Also it seems to me in sna, that when there is no relationship between say,
c and d,  sna'ers call this a 'structural hole' however, it remains unclear
to me, the nature of this relationship. Are these two negative to one
another (that is, dont choose one another), or do they even know one
another? If you go to Moreno's original work 'who shall survive' you see
some great diagrams of this phenomena.

This year, Zerka Moreno, Dr Moreno's partner and muse for over 30 years, has
a book of her writings from 1944 being publised by Routeledge, and she has a
number of papers on tele and the nature of tele.  SNA researchers will find
her work significant and well informed in understanding applications of
positive and negative choices when mapping positive and negative
relationships.

regards, Diana Jones


-----Original Message-----
From: Neubauer, Bruce [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 26 July 2006 9:12 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: distinction between values of meanings and strengths of
relationships


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



I am confused by the notion of negative relationships.  It seems to me
that if there are two poles to the meaning of a relationship it should
be modeled as two relationships and not as one relationship with
positive and negative values.  I see the presence or absence of a
relationship as a question independent of the strength and meaning of a
relationship if one exists.  Perhaps this is a question of the
distinction between strength of relationship and meaning
(interpretation) of a relationship.  How can the strength of a
relationship be negative when zero represents the absence of a
relationship?  Measures of things like love and hate are not necessarily
mutually exclusive in a linear way.  Also, is it more intuitive to
represent the strength of a relationship by the thickness or color of
the line rather than by the length of the line (or the distance between
the nodes)?  Does a long line between nodes intuitively suggest a strong
association (the length of the line) or a weak association (the distance
between nodes)?



Bruce








_____________________________________________________________________
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.