






Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Network approaches to kinship examine the structure of marriage rules and the strategies for social bonding across generations. Kinship Networks, Large Kinship Nets, Friendship on Frat Row, Evolving Network, Name Generators, Guanxi, Clientalistic Cultures Kin, Friends, Community, Social Network Analysis Theories, Sociology, David Knoke, Minnesota State University (MN), United States of America (USA)
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 11
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
In Anatomy of Kinship (1963) Harrison White used matrix algebra to simplify complex classificatory rules regarding marriage and parentage. These rules generate clans among people in the same kinship situation. The resulting classificatory kinship system operates as an abstract group. White showed how to classify existing clan systems into a few basic types, revealing a wider variety of clan systems than anthropologists had previously hypothesized.
“Two groups follow a simple convergence story -- with their nominations getting progressively more stable as time passes. The first of these groups … has 7 members, including the cluster at the right of the movie (1,6,13,8) and presents a gradual convergence of nomination patterns, while the second (with 6 members) does not converge on stable nomination patterns until week 5. Finally, group 3 (with 4 members, including hanger-on nodes 10 & 15) never seems to settle on a particular nomination pattern, but changes nominations steadily over the observation period.”
For each pair of alters: “Are (Name) and (Name) total strangers? Especially close?” After asking about every alter‟s gender, race, age, occupation, etc.: “Here is a list of some of the ways in which people are connected to each other. Some people can be connected to you in more than one way. For example, a man could be your brother and he may belong to your church and be your lawyer. When I read you a name, please tell me all the ways that person is
Spouse, parent, sibling, child, other family, coworker, member of group to which you belong, neighbor, friend, professional advisor or consultant, other
Median size = 3 alters; 25% have 0-1 alters, 25% have 5- Half of alters are ego‟s kin; only 20% have no kin in their networks Alters know one another: mean density = 0.61; only 5% all strangers High race/ethnic homogeneity; only 8% have any alter diversity Substantial sex diversity: 78% have at least one alter of opposite sex (most often a spouse, sibling, or parent)
“The GSS survey network data describe relatively small, kin-centered, dense, homogeneous social environments surrounding Americans. … To the extent that success of „networking‟ as an instrumentally oriented pursuit depends on access to diverse others, those best situated to make use of it are the young and middle-aged, the well-educated, and those living in larger places” (Marsden 1987:130). The 2004 GSS survey found significantly smaller ego-nets & more isolates.
(Knoke 1990:142).
Fischer, Claude. 1982. To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Knoke, David. 1990. Political Networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Marsden, Peter V. 1987. “Core Discussion Networks of Americans.” American Sociological Review 52:122-131.
Moody, James, Daniel McFarland, Skye Bender-de Moll. 2004. “Dynamic Network Visualization: Methods for Meaning with Longitudinal Network Movies.” (Downloaded October 2, 2004) <www.sociology.ohio-state.edu/jwm/NetMovies/Sub_CD/dynamic_nets_public.html>
Nadel, S. F. 1957. The Theory of Social Structure. London: Cohen & West.
Wellman, Barry. 1979. “The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yorkers.” American Journal of Sociology 84:1201-1231.
White, Douglas R., Vladimir Batagelj and Andrej Mrvar 1999. “Anthropology: Analyzing Large Kinship and Marriage Networks with Pgraph and Pajek.” Social Science Computer Review 17(3):245-274.
White, Harrison C. 1963. An Anatomy of Kinship: Mathematical Models for Structures of Cumulated Roles. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Yi, Lee Mei and Paul Ellis. 2000. “Insider-Outsider Perspectives of Guanxi.” Business Horizons 43:25-30.