Political Network Size and Its Antecedents and Consequences

Abstract

Recent evidence supports the important political role that political network size and distribution plays at both the individual and system levels. However, we argue that the evidence is likely stronger than the current literature suggests due to network size measurement limitations in the extant literature. The most common approach to measuring political network size in sample surveys—the “name generator” approach—normally constrains network size measurement to three to six individuals. Because of this constraint, research often undercounts individual network size and also leads to a misrepresentation of the distribution of the underlying variable. Using multiple data sets and alternative measurement approaches, we reveal that political network hubs—individuals with inordinately large network sizes not captured by name generators—exist and can be identified with a simple summary network measure. We also demonstrate that the summary network size measure reveals the expected differences in communicative, personality, and political variables across network size better than name generator measures. This suggests that not only has prior research failed to identify network hubs, but it has likely underestimated the influence of political network size at the individual level.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 57 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.