networks4newbies
-
Upload
webuploader -
Category
Technology
-
view
104 -
download
0
description
Transcript of networks4newbies
A Non-Technical Introduction to Social Network Analysis
Barry WellmanFounder, International Network
For Social Network Analysis
Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto
Toronto, Canada M5S [email protected]
www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
NetLab
Three Ways to Look at Reality
Categories All Possess One or More Properties as an Aggregate of Individuals Examples: Men, Developed Countries
Groups (Almost) All Densely-Knit Within Tight Boundary Thought of as a Solidary Unit (Really a Special Network) Family, Workgroup, Community
Networks Set of Connected Units: People, Organizations, Networks Can Belong to Multiple Networks Examples: Friendship, Organizational, Inter-Organizational, World-
System, Internet
4
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanNodes, Relationships &
Ties Nodes: A Unit That Possibly is Connected
Individuals, Households, Workgroups,Organizations, States
Relationships (A Specific Type of Connection)A “Role Relationship”
Gives Emotional Support Sends Money To Attacks
Ties (One or More Relationships) Friendship (with possibly many relationships)
Affiliations (Person – Organization) Works for IBM; INSNA Member; Football Team
One-Mode, Two-Mode Networks
5
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
A Network is More Than The Sum of Its Ties
A Network Consists of One or More Nodes Could be Persons, Organizations, Groups,
Nations Connected by One or More Ties
Could be One or More Relationships That Form Distinct, Analyzable Patterns
Can Study Patterns of Relationships OR Ties Emergent Properties (Simmel vs. Homans)
6
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
In a Sentence –
“To Discover How A, Who is in Touch with B and C, Is Affected by the Relation Between B & C”
John Barnes
7
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman2 Minute History of Sunbelt Conference
Informal conferences in mid-late 1970s Toronto (1974); Hawaii
Formalized as Sunbelt 1981 – annual Why “Sunbelt”? Normal Rotation: SE US, US West, Europe
Slovenia (2004); Charleston (Feb 2005), Vancouver?
Always Informal, But Serious Work
10 Minute History of INSNA Founded by Barry Wellman in 1976-1977
Sabbatical Travel Carried Tales Nick Mullins: Every “Theory Group” Has an Organizational
Leader Owned by Wellman until 1988 as small business
Subsequent Coordinators/Presidents Al Wolfe, Steve Borgatti, Martin Everett
• Steering Committee• Non-Profit Constitution under Borgatti; Coordinator > President
Bill Richards President, 2003-• Scott Feld VP; Katie Faust Treasurer; Frans Stokman, Euro. Rep.• Our First Real Election
Grown from 175 to 400 Members Many More on Listserv (Not Limited to Members)
Steve Borgatti maintains; unmoderated Website: www.insna.sfu.ca -- being upgraded
9
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman10 Minute Overview - Journals
Wellman founded,edited,published Connections, 1977 Informal journal: “Useful” articles, news, gossip, grants,
abstracts, book summaries Bill Richards, Tom Valente edit now
Lin Freeman founded, edits Social Networks, 1978? Formal journal: Refereed articles Ronald Breiger now co-editor
David Krackhardt founded, edits J of Social Structure, 2000? Online, Refereed Lots of visuals Articles Appear Occasionally when their time has come
10 Minute Overview – Key Books
1) Elizabeth Bott, Family & Social Network, 19572) J. Clyde Mitchell, Networks, Norms & Institutions, 19733) Holland & Leinhardt, Perspectives on Social Network
Research,1979s4) S. D. Berkowitz, An Introduction to Structural Analysis, 19825) Knoke & Kuklinski, Network Analysis, 1983, Sage, low-cost6) Charles Tilly, Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge
Comparisons, 19847) Wellman & Berkowitz, eds., Social Structures, 19888) David Knoke, Political Networks, 19909) John Scott, Social Network Analysis, 199110) Ron Burt, Structural Holes, 199211) Manuel Castells, The Rise of Network Society, 1996, 200012) Wasserman & Faust, Social Network Analysis, 199213) Nan Lin, Social Capital (monograph & reader), 2001
10 Minute Overview – Software
1) UCINet – Whole Network Analysis1) Lin Freeman, Steve Borgatti, Martin Everett
2) MultiNet – Whole Network Analysis 1) + Nodal Characteristics
3) Structure – Ron Burt – Not Maintained4) P*Star – Dyadic Analysis – Stan Wasserman5) Krackplot – Network Visualization (Obsolete)
1) David Krackhardt, Jim Blythe
6) Pajek – Network Visualization – Supersedes Krackplot 1) Slovenia
7) Personal Network Analysis1) SPSS/SAS – See Wellman, et al. “How To…” papers
10 Minute Overview – Data Basis Small Group “Sociometry”1930s > (Moreno, Bonacich, Cook)
Finding People Who Enjoy Working Together Evolved into Exchange Theory, Small Group Studies
Ethnographic Studies, 1950s > (Mitchell, Barnes) Does Modernization > Disconnection?
Survey Research: Personal Networks, 1970s > Community, Support & Social Capital, “Guanxi”
Mathematics & Simulation, 1970s > (Freeman, White) Formalist / Methods & Substantive Analysis
Survey & Archival Research, Whole Nets, 1970s > Organizational, Inter-Organizational, Inter-National Analyses
Political Structures, 1970s > (Tilly, Wallerstein) Social Movements, Mobilization (anti Alienation) World Systems (asymmetric structure > Globalization)
Computer Networks as Social Networks, late 1990s > (Sack) Automated Data Collection
The Multiple Ways of Network Analysis
Method – The Most Visible Manifestation Misleading to Confuse Appearance with Reality
Data Gathering – see previous slide Theory – Pattern Matters Substance
Community, Organizational, Inter-Organizational, Terrorist, World System An Add-On:
Add a Few Network Measures to a Study Integrated Approach
A Way of Looking at the World: Theory, Data Collection, Data Analysis, Substantive Analysis
Not Actor-Network Theory Links to Structural Analyses in Other Disciplines
14
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The Social Network Approach The world is composed of networks
- not densely-knit, tightly-bounded groups Networks provide flexible means of social
organization and of thinking about social organization
Networks have emergent properties of structure and composition
Networks are a major source of social capital mobilizable in themselves and from their contents
Networks are self-shaping and reflexive Networks scale up to networks of networks
15
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The Social Network Approach
Moving from a hierarchical society bound up in little boxes to a network – and networking – society
Multiple communities / work networks Multiplicity of specialized relations Management by networks More alienation, more maneuverability
Loosely-coupled organizations / societies Less centralized The networked society
16
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Changing Connectivity:Groups to Networks
Densely Knit > Sparsely-Knit Impermeable (Bounded) > Permeable Broadly-Based Solidarity >
Specialized Multiple Foci
17
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Networked Individualism Moving from a society bound up in little boxes to
a multiple network – and networking – society Networks are a flexible means of social
organization Networks are a major source of social capital:
mobilizable in themselves & from their contents Networks link:
Persons Within organizations Between organizations and institutions
Little Boxes Ramified Networks**** Each in its Place Mobility of People and Goods **** United Family Serial Marriage, Mixed Custody Shared Community Multiple, Partial Personal Nets Neighborhoods Dispersed Networks Voluntary Organizations Informal Leisure Face-to-Face Computer-Mediated Communication Public Spaces Private Spaces Focused Work Unit Networked Organizations Job in a Company Career in a Profession Autarky Outsourcing Office, Factory Airplane, Internet, Cellphone Ascription Achievement Hierarchies Matrix Management Conglomerates Virtual Organizations/Alliances Cold War Blocs Fluid, Transitory Alliances
Barry Wellman co-editor Social Structure: A Network ApproachJAI-Elsevier Press 1998
Little Boxes
Glocalization
Networked Individualism
20
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanWays of Looking at
Networks
Whole Networks & Personal Networks Focus on the System or on the Set of
Individuals Graphs & Matrices
We dream in graphs We analyze in matrices
21
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Whole Social Networks Comprehensive Set of Role Relationships in an Entire Social
System Analyze Each Role Relationship – Can Combine Composition: % Women; Heterogeneity; % Weak Ties Structure: Pattern of Ties Village, Organization, Kinship, Enclaves,
World-System Copernican Airplane View Typical Methods: Cliques, Blocks, Centrality, Flows Examples: (1) What is the Real Structure of an Organization? (2) How Does Information Flow Through a Village?
22
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Cumulative GlobeNet Intercitation Through 2000
Howard White & Barry Wellman, 2003 “Does Citation Reflect Social Structure”
23
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanStrongest Globenet Co-
Citation, Intercitation Links Thru 2000
24
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanDuality of Persons &
Groups
People Link Groups Groups Link People An Interpersonal Net is
an Interorganizational Net
Ronald Breiger 1973
25
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The Dualities of Persons and Groups -- Graphs
26
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Dualities of Persons and Groups -- Matrices
27
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Dualities of Persons and Groups: Event-Event Matrix
28
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanNeat Whole Network
Methods QAP
Regression of Matrices• Example: Co-Citation (Intellectual Tie)
Predicts Better than Friendship (Social Tie)To Inter-Citation
Clustering: High Density; Tight Boundaries (“Groups”)
Block Modeling Similar Role Relationships, Not Necessarily Clusters Canada & Mexico in Same Block – US Dominated
29
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Erickson, 1988: From a Matrix > . . .
30
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
. . . To a Block Model
31
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Costs of Whole Network Analysis
Requires a Roster of Entire Population Requires (Imposition of) a Social
Boundary This May Assume What You Want to Find
Hard to Handle Missing Data Needs Special Analytic Packages
Becoming Easier to Use
32
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Personal Social Networks
Ptolemaic Ego-Centered View Good for Unbounded Networks Often Uses Survey Research Example: (1) Do Densely-Knit Networks Provide
More Support? (structure) (2) Do More Central People Get More Support?
(network) (2) Do Women Provide More Support? (composition) (3) Do Face-to-Face Ties Provide More Support
Than Internet Ties? (relational) (4) Are People More Isolated Now? (ego)
33
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanCosts of Personal Network
Studies
Concentrates on Strong Ties Collecting Proper Data in Survey Takes Much
Time Ignores Ecological Juxtapositions Hard to Aggregate from Personal Network to
Whole Network Easier to Decompose Whole Network
• (Haythornthwaite & Wellman)
Often Relies on Respondents’ Reports
34
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanSocial Network Analysis: More
Flavors Diffusion of Information (& Viruses)
Flows Through Systems Organizational Analyses
“Real” Organization” Knowledge Acquisition & Management
Inter-Organizational Analysis Is There a Ruling Elite Strategies, Deals
Networking: How People Network As a Strategy Unconscious Behavior Are There Networking Personality Types?
35
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
SNA: Branching Out Social Movements World-Systems Analyses Cognitive Networks Citation Networks
Co-Citation Inter-Citation
Applied Networks Terrorist Networks Corruption Networks
Multilevel Analysis:New Approach to an Old
Problem Switching and Combining Levels
Individual Agency, Dyadic Dancing, Network Facilitation & Emergent Properties
Consider Wider Range of Theories Disentangles (& Avoids Nagging Confounding)
Tie Effects Network Effects Contingent (Cross-Level) Effects Interactions
Addresses Emergent Properties Fundamental Sociological Issue Simmel vs. Homans
37
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Multilevel Analysis – Tie Effects
Tie Strength: Stronger is More Supportive
Workmates: Provide More Everyday Support
• (Multilevel Discovered This)
38
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Multilevel Analysis– Network Effects
Network Size •Not Only More Support from Entire Network•More Probability of Support from Each Network
Member Mutual Ties (Reciprocity):
•Those Who Have More Ties with Network Members Provide More Support
•Cross-Level Effect Stronger (and Attenuates)Dyadic (Tie-Level) EffectIt’s Contribution to the Network, Not the Alter
39
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanMultilevel Analysis:
Cross-Level, Interaction Effects
Kinship No longer a solidary system Parent-(Adult) Child Interaction
• More Support From Each When > 1 Parent-Child Tie
• Single P-C Tie: 34%• 2+ P-C Ties, Probability of Support from Each: 54%
40
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Multilevel Interactions-- Accessibility 37% of Moderately Accessible Ties
Provide Everyday Support But If Overall Network Is
Moderately Supportive, 54% of All Network Members
Provide Everyday Support Women More Supportive
In Nets with More Women
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
41
The Internet in Everyday Life
Computer Networks as Social Networks Key Questions Community On and Off line
Networked Life before the Internet Netville: The Wired Suburb Large Web Surveys: National Geographic
Work On and Off line Towards Networked Individualism, or
The Retreat to Little Boxes
42
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Social Affordances of New Forms of Computer-Mediated Connectivity
Bandwidth Ubiquity – Anywhere, Anytime Convergence – Any Media Accesses All Portability – Especially Wireless Globalized Connectivity Personalization
Research Questions1. Ties: Does the Internet support all types of ties?
1. Weak and Strong?2. Instrumental and Socio-Emotional?3. Online-Only or Using Internet & Other Media (F2F, Phone)?
2. Social Capital: Has the Internet increased, decreased, or multiplied contact – at work, in society?
1. Interpersonally – Locally2. Interpersonally – Long Distance3. Organizationally
3. GloCalization: Has the map of the world dissolved so much that distance does not matter?
Has the Internet brought spatial and social peripheries closer to the center?
44
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanResearch Questions
(cont’d)
4. Structure: Does the Internet facilitate working in loosely-coupled networks rather than dense, tight groups?
5. Knowledge Management: How do people find and acquire usable knowledge in networked and virtual organizations
45
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Guiding Research Principles
Substitute systematic data analysis for hype Do field studies, not lab experiments Combine statistical with observational info. Study the use of each media in larger context Work with other disciplines Analyze Existing Uses Develop New Uses
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
46
Studies of Community On and Off-Line
Pre-Internet Networked Communities
“Netville”: The Wired Suburb National Geographic Web Survey 1998, 2001 Other Internet Community Studies
Barry Wellman, “The Network Community” Introduction to Networks in the Global Village Westview Press, 1999
Source: Dan Heap Parliamentary Campaign 1992 (NDP)
Toronto in the Continental Division of Labor
48
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanPhysical Place and Cyber
Place
Door to Door, Place to Place, Person to Person, Role to Role
Barry Wellman, “Changing Connectivity: A Future History of Y2.03K.” Sociological Research Online 4, 4, February 2000: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/4/wellman.html
Barry Wellman, “Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Networked Individualism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 25 (2001): June.
49
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Door To Door
Old Workgroups/ Communities Based on Propinquity, Kinship Pre-Industrial Villages, Wandering Bands
All Observe and Interact with All Deal with Only One Group Knowledge Comes Only From Within
the Group – and Stays Within the Group
Place To Place(Phones, Networked PCs, Airplanes, Expressways, RR, Transit)
Home, Office Important Contexts, Not Intervening Space
Ramified & Sparsely Knit: Not Local Solidarities Not neighborhood-based Not densely-knit with a group feeling
Partial Membership in Multiple Workgroups/ Communities Often Based on Shared Interest Connectivity Beyond Neighborhood, Work Site Household to Household /
Work Group to Work Group Domestication, Feminization of Community Deal with Multiple Groups Knowledge Comes From Internal & External Sources “Glocalization”: Globally Connected, Locally Invested
51
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Person To Person(Cell Phones, Wireless Computing)
Little Awareness of Context Individual, Not Household or Work Group Personalized Networking Tailored Media Interactions Private Desires Replace Public Civility Less Caring for Strangers, Fewer Weak Ties Online Interactions Linked with Offline Dissolution of the Internal: All Knowledge is External
52
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Role To Role
Tailored Communication Media Little Awareness of Whole Person Portfolios of Specialized Relationships
Boutiques, not Variety Stores Cycling among Specialized
Communities / Work Groups Role-Based Media Interactions Management by Network
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
53
“Netville”: The Wired Suburb
Leading-Edge Development Exurban Toronto Mid-Priced, Detached Tract Homes Bell Canada, etc. Field Trial 10Mb/sec, ATM-Based, No-Cost Internet Services Ethnographic Fieldwork
Hampton Lived There for 2 Years Survey Research
Wants, Networks, Activities
The entrance to Netville
55
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
View of Netville
56
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
“Wired” and “Non-Wired” Neighboring in Netville
Recognized by Name 25.5 8.4 3.0 .00
Talk with Regularly 6.3 3.1 2.0 .06
Invited into Own Home
3.9 2.7 1.4 .14
Invited into Neighbors’ Homes
3.9 2.5 1.6 .14
# of Intervening Lots to Known Neighbors
7.5 5.6 1.4 .08
Mean Number of Neighbors:
Wired(37)
Non-Wired(20)
Wired/ NonWired
Ratio
Signif. Level(p <)
57
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Neighboring Ties
Wired Residents Recognize More Talk with More Invite More Into their Homes
And are Invited by Them Neighbor in a Wider Area
58
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Long-Distance Ties (>50 km/30 mi )
Compared to one year before moving to Netville,Wired Residents Have More Than Non-More Than Non-Wired:Wired:
Social Contact – especially over 500 km Help Given (e.g., childcare, home repair) Help Received from Friends and Relatives
Especially between 50 and 500 km
59
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Long-Distance Ties
Wired Residents Say the Internet:
Makes it Easier to Communicate Fosters Greater Volume of
Communication Introduces New Modes of
Communication Acquire More Diverse Knowledge
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman“Netville”: The Wired
SuburbWith Keith Hampton (MIT)
“Netville Online and Offline: Observing and Surveying a Wired Suburb.” American Behavioral Scientist 43, 3 (Nov 1999): 475-92.
“Examining Community in the Digital Neighborhood” Pp. 475-92 in Digital Cities: Technologies, Experiences and Future Perspectives, edited by Toru Ishida and Katherine Isbister. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2000.
“Long Distance Community in the Network Society” American Behavioral Scientist, 45 (Nov 2001): 477-97
“How the Internet Builds Local Community”. City and Community, 2001
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
61
National Geographic Survey 2000 and Survey 2001
“Survey 2000” -- Fall 1998 35,000 Americans 5,000 Canadians 15,000 “Others” “Survey 2001” -- Fall 2001, N >
6,000
62
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanSurvey 2000 Research
Questions
Are There Systematic Social Variations in Who Uses the Internet – for What?
Does the Internet Multiply, Add To, or Decrease Interpersonal Ties?
Does the Internet Multiply, Add To, or Decrease Organizational Involvement?
Does the Internet Increase, Decrease or Transform Community Commitment?
Does the Internet Increase Knowledge? Are There Variations by National Context?
63
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Figure 2a: Frequency of Contact with Near-by Kin (Days/Year)
228
114
5 6 7 7
208191 193
201 209
117 113 116 118 116
8467 65 64 63 58
23
1
49136
6
66
0
50
100
150
200
250
Never Rarely Monthly Weekly Few times/wk Daily
Email Use
Total Phone F2F Email Letters
Percentage of Different Media Used for Contact with Near-By Kin
Phone53%
Email17%
Letters3%
F2F27%
64
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanFigure 3a: Frequency of Contact with Near-By Friends (Days/Year)
345
72 83
5 6 9
236
194192207
248
11097102109
136 124
7687106 92
3619
1
120
975
650
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Never Rarely Monthly Weekly Few times/wk Daily
Email Use
Total Phone F2F Email Letters
Percentage of Media: Used for Contact with Near-By Friends
Phone39%
Email29%
Letters3%
F2F29%
65
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanFigure 4a: Frequency of Contact with Far-away Kin (Days/Year)
8 9 9
42
7 7 9 91
18
34
71
132
10 109
35 35 3237 39
7
10
4
10
91
73
575653
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Never Rarely Monthly Weekly Few times/ wk DailyEmail Use
F2F Phone Letters Email Total
Percentage of Media Used for Contact with Far-Away Kin
Phone35%
F2F8%
Email49%
Letters8%
66
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Figure 5a: Frequency of Contact with Far-Away Friends (Days/Year)
19 17 1519
25
10 90
29
86
48
2836
63
128
35
17
71
88
47
17
7 6 87660
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Never Rarely Monthly Weekly Few times/ wk Daily
Email Use
Total Phone F2F Email Letters
Percentage of Media Used for Contact with Far-Away Friends
Phone22%
F2F9%
Email62%
Letters7%
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
67
Computer Supported Cooperative Work
Fishbowls and Switchboards Media Use and Choice
Cerise Indigo
Networked Scholarly Organizations Technet Globenet
Teleworking: The Home-Work Nexus
68
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The “Fishbowl” Group Office: Door-to-Door
All Work Together in Same Room All Visible to Each Another All have Physical Access to Each Other All can see when a Person is Interruptible All can see when One Person is with Another
No Real Secrets No Secret Meetings Anyone can Observe Conversations & Decide to Join
Little Alert to Others Approaching
69
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Neighbors have Hi Visual & Aural Awareness Limited Number of Participants Densely-Knit (most directly connected) Tightly Bounded (most interactions within group) Frequent Contact Recurrent Interactions Long-Duration Ties Cooperate for Clear, Collective purposes Sense of Group Solidarity (name, collective
identity) Social Control by Supervisor & Group
70
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanThe “Switchboard” Network
Office:Person-to-Person
Each Works Separately Office Doors Closable for Privacy Glass in Doors Indicate Interruptibility If Doors Locked, Must Knock
If Doors Open, Request Admission Difficult to learn if Person is Dealing with Others
Unless Door is Open Large Number of Potential Interactors
Average Person knows > 1,000 Strangers & Friends of Friends May also be Contacted
71
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Sparsely-Knit Most Don’t Know Each Other Or Not Aware of Mutual Contact No Detailed Knowledge of Indirect Ties
Loosely-Bounded Many Different People Contacted Many Different Workplaces Can Link with Outside Organizations
Each Functions Individually Collective Activities Transient, Shifting Sets Subgroups, Cleavages, Secrets Can Develop
72
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman“Cerise” / “Indigo”
CSCW
Using Video/ Email at Work R&D Work:
Faculty, Students, Programmers, Admin.
Caroline Haythornthwaite & Laura Garton Collaborators
Survey and Ethnography
73
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanCSCW Research
Questions
How do Work, Social Roles Affect Media Use? Is Email Used Only for Specialized
Communication? Does Email Use:
Replace, Add To, or Increase F2F, Phone Contact?
Does Email Move Spatial/Social Peripheries Socially Closer?
Does Email Foster Networked Organization?
74
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanSeparate Information Exchange
Roles Derived from Factor Analysis of Specific Exchanges
Work Giving Work Receiving Work Collaborative Writing Computer Programming
Social Sociability Major Emotional Support
75
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Communication Roles Scheduled Meetings
Classes, Research Meetings Email Unscheduled Meetings
Less Frequent, More Wide-Ranging
Media that Afford Control of Interactions Media associated with Group Norms
76
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Social Roles
Sociability, major emotional support
Media Use follows Pairs’ Interaction Patterns Unscheduled Meetings for Close Friends Unscheduled, Scheduled, Email for Work-Only
Media that Affords Spontaneity Social Messages Tag on Work Messages
Work-Only Pairs; Formal Work-Role Pairs
77
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The Average Pair:
Specialized: Exchanges 3/6 Types of Information
Via 1 or 2 Media Unscheduled F2F, Scheduled F2F Meetings, or
Mean = 5.2 Information-Media Links / Pair
78
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanConclusions: The Cerise
Study
Away from Individual Choice, Congruency Social Affordances Only Create Possibilities
Email Used for All Roles: Work, Knowledge, Sociability and Support
Email Lowers Status Distances Email Network Not a Unique Social Network
Intermixed with Face-to-Face (low use of phone, video, fax)
Reduces Temporal as well as Spatial Distances
79
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The More Email, the More F2F Contact The More Intense Work & Friendship Tie
The More Frequent Email Independent Predictors: Friendship a bit Stronger
The More Intense Work & Friendship Tie The More Types of Media Used to Communicate Independent Predictors: Friendship Stronger
F2F the Medium of choice in weaker ties. In Stronger Ties, Email Supplements F2F
80
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanIndigo: Work Interaction
Time 1
Work Interaction (All Media) Prior to Telepresence
81
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanIndigo: Work Interaction
Time 3
Work Interaction (All Media) 14 months after Telepresence Intro
Greater Decentralization
82
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
“Cerise” / “Indigo” Papers
Caroline Haythornthwaite and Barry Wellman, “Work, Friendship and Media Use for Information Exchange in a Networked Organization.”Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 (1998): 1101-14
Marilyn Mantei, Ronald Baecker, William Buxton, Thomas Milligan, Abigail Sellen and Barry Wellman. "Experiences in the Use of a Media Space." 1992. Pp 372-78 in Groupware, edited by David Marca and Geoffrey Bock. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1992.
Caroline Haythornthwaite, Barry Wellman & Marilyn Mantei “Work Relationships and Media Use.” Group Decision and Negotiation 4 (1995): 193-211.
Caroline Haythornthwaite, Barry Wellman & Laura Garton, “Work and Community Via Computer-Mediated Communication.” Pp. 199-226 in Psychology and the Internet, edited by Jayne Gackenbach. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998.
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
83
Netting Scholars: Communities of Practice & Inquiry
Emmanuel Koku, Nancy Nazer & Barry Wellman“Netting Scholars: Online and Offline.” American Behavioral Scientist, 44 ,10 (June, 2001): 1750-72
Emmanuel Koku & Barry Wellman“Scholarly Networks as Learning Communities”In Designing Virtual Communities in the Service of
Learning, Edited by Sasha Barab & Rob Kling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002
84
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanComparison of 2 Scholarly
NetworksGlobenet Technet
Year Founded
Founded in 1991-93 Founded in 1995-96
Size 16 (13 men, 3 women)
32 (22 men, 9 women)
Membership
Invitational: merit, interdisciplinary, niche
Voluntary
Location Canada, US, UK 1 Ontario universityActivities 3 Meetings /year
Production of a book
Frequent seminars, conferencesJoint courses, retreats
Funding 9 Senior Fellows get full salaries7 Associate Fellows get partial funding
Members not funded by TechnetMany receive other research grants
85
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Globenet members use both F2F & email to get their joint projects done. The dispersion of members across Canada, U.S. & U.K. leads them to use email as a collaborative tool.
86
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
.For Globenetters, the
distance between members of scholarly pairs is unrelated to the frequency of their email contact.
Except when they’re in the same building
87
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Friendship is the strongest predictor to face-to-face & email contact in Technet & Globenet
88
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
The scholarly relationship of collaborating on a project is the second strongest predictor of frequent F2F contact & frequent email contact.
It & friendship are the only 2 significant predictors.
89
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Congruent with the theories of media use: Tasks requiring complex negotiations preferably conducted via richer F2F contacts.
Technet members use F2F contact when possible.
Email fills in temporal & informational gaps. Those Technet members who often read each other’s work, communicate more by email.
90
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Where F2F contact is easily done, it is the preferred medium for collaborative work.
However, colleagues easily share their ideas and their work – or announce its existence – by email and web postings.
They do not have to walk over to each other’s offices to do this, although Canadian winters can inhibit in-person visits
91
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanSources of Prominence in
Globenet
External Sources Important for Gaining Entrance Scholarly Status Niche Plus Perceived Internal Congeniality
Internal Sources Important Within Network Knights of the Roundtable Formal Role Scholarly Communication within Network Number of Friendships
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
92
Summary: Ties
Internet Supports Strong & Weak Ties Evidence: Netville, Netting Scholars, Cerise, Telework
Internet Supports Instrumental & Socioemotional Ties Evidence: Netville, National Geographic, Netting Scholars,
Cerise, Telework Ties Rarely are Internet-Only
Evidence: Netville, National Geographic, Netting Scholars, Cerise, Telework
Internet Replaces Fax & May Reduce Phone – Not F2F Evidence: Netville, Netting Scholars, Cerise
93
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Summary: Local Social Capital
Multiplied Number & Range of Neighbors Evidence: Netville
Increased Contact with Existing Neighbors – Email Adds On to Same Levels of F2F, Phone Evidence: National Geographic, Berkeley, Netville?
Demand for Local Information Evidence: Netville, Berkeley, Small City Study
94
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Summary: Long Distance Ties
Increased Contact with Long Distance Ties – Email Adds On to Same Levels of F2F, Phone1. Friends More than Kin2. Long-Distance Ties More than Local3. Post Used Only for Rituals (Birthdays, Christmas) Evidence: National Geographic, Netville
95
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Summary: Long Distance Ties
Increased Contact with Long Distance Ties – Email Adds On to Same Levels of F2F, Phone1. Friends More than Kin2. Long-Distance Ties More than Local3. Post Used Only for Rituals (Birthdays, Christmas) Evidence: National Geographic, Netville
Summary:Computer-Mediated Communication
Not only supports online “virtual” communities Supports and maintains existing ties: strong & weak Increases connectivity with weak ties Supports both local and non-local social ties In Neighborhood, High-speed Network:
Increases local network size Increases amount of local contact
Long-Distance, High-Speed Network Increases amount of contact Increases support exchanged Facilitates contact with geographical periphery
Summary: The GloCalization Paradox
Surf and Email Globally Stay Wired at Office/Home to be Online Desire for Local/Distant Services and Information Internet Supplements/Augments F2F
Doesn’t Replace It; Rarely Used Exclusively Media Choice? By Any Means Available
Many Emails are Local – Within the Workgroup or Community
Local Becomes Just Another InterestEvidence: Netville, National Geographic, Small Cities,
Berkeley, Netting Scholars, Cerise, Indigo, Telework
98
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Summary: Social Network Structure
Internet Aids Both Direct & Indirect Connections Knowledge Acquisition & Management
• Accessing Friends of Friends• Forwarding & Folding In: Making Indirect Ties Direct Ties
Social and Spatial Peripheries Closer to the Center Shift from Spatial Propinquity to Shared Interests Shifting, Fluid Structures Networked, Long-Distance Coordination & “Reports”
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
99
Conclusions: Changing Connectivity
By Any Means Available Door-to-Door > Place-to-Place
> Person-to-Person Connectivity Less Solidary Households
Dual Careers Multiple Schedules Multiple Marriages
New Forms of Community Partial Membership in Multiple Communities
Networked & Virtual Work Relationships
100
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Conclusions:Role-to-Role Relationships
Partial Communities of: Shared, Specialized Interest
Importance of Informal Network Capital Production Reproduction Externalities
Bridging and Bonding Ties
101
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Conclusions:How a Network Society Looks
Multiplicity of Specialized Relations Management by Networks More Uncertainty, More Maneuverability Boutiques, not General Stores Less Palpable than Traditional Solidarities
Need Navigation Tools
An Electronic Group is Virtually a Social Network." Pp. 179-205 in Culture of the Internet, edited by Sara Kiesler. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997.
102
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanConclusions: Shift to New Kinds
Of Community & Workgroups Partial Membership in Multiple Networks Multiple Reports Long-Distance Relationships Transitory Work Relationships Each Person Operates Own Network Online Interactions Linked with Offline
Status, Power, Social Characteristics Important Sparsely-Knit: Fewer Direct Connections Than Door-To-
Door -- Need for Institutional Memory & Knowledge Management IKNOW (Nosh Contractor) – Network Tracer ContactMap (Bonnie Nardi & Steve Whittaker) – Network Accumulator
103
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Conclusions: The Rise of Personalized Networking
Individual Agency Constrained by Nets: Personalization rather than Group Behavior
Interpersonal Ties Dancing Dyadic Duets: Bandwidth Sparsely-Knit, Physically-Dispersed Ties
Social Networks Multiple, Ad Hoc Wireless Portability
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
104
Design Considerations for a Networked Society – Connecting
Open List Indicate Presence, Awareness, Availability Prioritize from Deductive, Inductive &
Ad Hoc Data Prioritize by Locale Searchable and Sortable List
By a Variety of Attributes
105
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanDesign Considerations for a
Networked Society – Autonomy
Incorporate Third Parties Quickly Set Up & Dissolve Work Teams Privacy Protection
Control Who is Aware of the Interaction Alert if Others Lurking File Access
Cross-Platform Communication
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
106
Three Modes of Interaction
Social Structure
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Metaphor Fishbowl Core-Periphery Switchboard
Unit of Analysis Village, Band, Shop, Office Household, Work, Unit, Multiple Networks
Networked Individual
Social Organization Groups Home Bases Network of Networks
Networked Individualism
Era Traditional Contemporary Emerging
107
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Boundaries
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Physical Context Dominance of immediate context
Relevance of immediate context Ignorance of immediate context
Modality Door-to-Door Place-to-Place Person-to-Person
Predominant Mode of Communication
Face-to-Face Wired phoneInternet
Mobile phone, Wireless modem
Spatial Range Local GloCal = Local + Global Global
Locale All in common household and work spaces
Common household and work spaces for core + external periphery
External
Awareness and Availability
All visible and audible to all High awareness of availability
Core immediately visible, audible; Little awareness of others’ availability -- must be contacted
Little awareness of availability Must be contacted Visibility and audibility must be negotiated
Access Control Doors wide open to in-group membersWalled off from othersExternal gate guarded
Doors ajar within and between networks Look, knock and ask
Doors closed Access to others by requestKnock and ask
Physical Access All have immediate access to all Core have immediate accessContacting others requires a journey or telecommunications
Contact requires a journey or telecommunications
Permeability Impermeable wall around unit Household and workgroup have strong to weak outside connections
Individual has strong to weak connections
108
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Interruptibility High: (Open Door) Norm of Interruption
Mixed: Core interruptibleOthers require deliberate requestsAnswering machineKnocking on door that may be ajar or closedNorm of Interruption within immediate network only
Low: Contact must be requested May be avoided or refusedPrioritizing voice mailInternet filterKnocking on door that may be ajar or closedNorm of interruption within immediate network only
Observability High: All can see when other group members are interacting
Mixed: Core can observe core Periphery cannot observe core or interactions with other network members
Low: Interactions with other network members rarely visible
Privacy Low information control: Few secretsStatus/Position becomes important capital
Low information control:Few secrets for coreVariable information control for peripheryMaterial resources and network connections become important capital
High information control:Many secrets Information and ties become important capital
Joining In Anyone can observe interactionsAnyone can join
Interactions outside the core rarely observable Difficult to join
Interactions rarely observable Difficult to join
Alerts Little awareness of others approaching Open, unlocked doors
High prior awareness of periphery’s desire to interact Telephone ring, doorbell
High prior awareness of others’ desire to interactFormal requests
Boundaries (continued)
Interpersonal Interactions
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Predominant Basis of Interaction
Ascription (What you are born into) e.g., Gender, ethnicity
“Protect Your Base Before You Attack” (attributed to Mao)
Free agent
Frequency of Contact High within group Moderate within core; Low to moderate outside of core
Variable, low with most; Moderate overall
Recurrency Recurrent interactions within group
Recurrent interactions within core; Intermittent with each network member
Low with most others; Moderate overall
Duration Long duration ties:cradle-to-grave; employed for life
Long duration for household core (except for divorce); Short duration otherwise
Short duration ties
Domesticity Cradle-to-graveMom and DadDick and Jane
Long-term partners Serial monogamy Dick lives with divorced parent
Changing partners; Living together; Singles; Single parents; Nanny cares for Jane
Scheduling Drop-In anytime Drop-in within household, work core;Appointments otherwise
Scheduled appointments
Transaction Speed Slow Variable in core; Fast in periphery
Fast
Autonomy & Proactivity
Low autonomyHigh reactivity
Mixed: Autonomy within household & work coresHigh proactivity & autonomy with others
High autonomy High proactivity
Tie Maintenance Group maintains ties Core groups maintain internal ties; Other ties must be actively maintained
Ties must be actively maintained, one-by-one
Predictability Predictability, certainty and security within group interactions
Moderate predictability, certainty and security within core; Interactions with others less predictable, certain and secure
Unpredictability, uncertainty, insecurity, contingency, opportunity
Latency Leaving is betrayal; Re-Entry difficult
Ability to reestablish relationships quickly with network members not seen in years
Ability to reestablish relationships quickly with network members not seen in years
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Number of Social Circles
Few: Household, kin, work Multiple: Core household, work unit; Multiple sets of friends, kin, work associates, neighbors
Multiple: Dyadic or network ties with household, work unit, friends, kin, work associates, neighbors
Maneuverability Little choice of social circles Choice of core and other social circles
Choice of social circles
Trust Building Enforced by group Betrayal of one is betrayal of all
Core enforces trust Networked members depend on cumulative reciprocal exchanges and ties with mutual others
Dependent on cumulative reciprocal exchanges and ties with mutual others
Social Support Broad (“multistranded”) Broad household and work core; Specialized kin, friends, other work
Specialized
Social Integration By groups only Cross-cutting ties between networks integrate society;Core is the common hub
Cross-cutting ties between networks integrate society
Cooperation Group cooperationJoint activity for clear, collective purposes
Core cooperation; Otherwise: short-term alliances, tentatively reinforced by trust building and ties with mutual others
Independent schedules Transient alliances with shifting sets of others
Knowledge All aware of most information Information open to all within unit Secret to outsiders
Core Knows Most Things Variable awareness of and access to what periphery knows
Variable awareness of and access to what periphery knows
Social Control Superiors and group exercise tight control
Moderate control by core household and workgroup, with some spillover to interactions with periphery Fragmented control within specialized networks Adherence to norms must be internalized by individuals
Subgroups, cleavages Partial, fragmented control within specialized networksAdherence to norms must be internalized by individuals
Resources Conserves resources Acquires resources for core units
Acquires resources for self
Basis of Success Getting along Position within group
Getting alongPosition within core; Networking
NetworkingFilling structural holes between networks
Social Networks
111
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism
Socialization Obey group elders Obey your parents; cherish your spouse; nurture your children;Defer to your boss; work and play well with colleagues and friends
Develop strategies and tactics for self-advancement
Sense of Solidarity High group solidarityCollective identityCollective name
Moderate solidarity within core household and workgroup, Vitiated by many ties to multiple peripheries
Sense of being an autonomous individualFuzzy identifiable networks
Loyalty Particularistic: High group loyalty
Public and private spheres: Moderate loyalty to home base takes precedence over weak loyalty elsewhere
SelfGlobal weak and divided loyalties
Conflict Handling Revolt, coupIrrevocable departure
Back-bitingKeeping distance
AvoidanceExit
Commitment to Network Members
High within groups High within core; Variable elsewhere
Variable
Zeitgeist Communitarian Conflicted Existential
Norms and Perceptions
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
112
After 9-11: Retreat to Little Boxes?
Back from Networks to Little Boxes? Re-establishing Tight Boundaries Knowledge Workers’ Spatial Mobility Hindered Goods Made and Sold Locally Distrust of Outsiders Drawing into Densely-Knit Groups
Gated Communities Gated Work: All Work Done on Premises – Autarky Direct Ties, F2F Ties Replace
Indirect, Computer Mediated Ties Network Analysis Used by Terrorists &
Governments
Little Boxes Ramified Networks**** Each in its Place Mobility of People and Goods **** United Family Serial Marriage, Mixed Custody Shared Community Multiple, Partial Personal Nets Neighborhoods Dispersed Networks Voluntary Organizations Informal Leisure Face-to-Face Computer-Mediated Communication Public Spaces Private Spaces Focused Work Unit Networked Organizations Job in a Company Career in a Profession Autarky Outsourcing Office, Factory Airplane, Internet, Cellphone Ascription Achievement Hierarchies Matrix Management Conglomerates Virtual Organizations/Alliances Cold War Blocs Fluid, Transitory Alliances
114
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Edited Books The Internet in Everyday Life
Caroline Haythornthwaite, co-editor Oxford: Blackwell Publishers 2002 Preliminary: American Behavioral Scientist, Nov 2001
Networks in the Global Village Boulder, CO: Westview Press 1999
Social Structures: A Network Approach S. D. Berkowitz, co-editor Cambridge University Press, 1988; Reprinted: Elsevier-JAI Press, 1997 Reprinted: CSPI Press, Toronto, 2003
115
Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman
Recent Integrative Articles
“Computer Networks as Social Networks”Science 293 (Sept 14, 2001): 2031-34.
“Designing the Internet for a Networked Society.”Communications of the ACM, April 2002: in press.
Research Supported By:Institute of Knowledge Management,CITO, Mitel, National Science Foundation (US),Social Science & Humanities Research Council of Canada
Thank You -- Barry Wellman
Director, NetLabCentre for Urban & Community StudiesUniversity of TorontoToronto, Canada M5S [email protected]/~wellman