A note on sociometric order in the general social survey network data

Ronald S. Burt

152 citations0/0 files storedSocial Networks

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Social Capital and Networks Complex Network Analysis Techniques Survey Methodology and Nonresponse

Abstract

The people identified as important discussion partners in the GSS network data were cited in order of strength of relationship with respondent; the first cited person having the strongest relation, the second having the next strongest, and so on. On average, the third citation is a turning point. There is a steep, linear decline in relationship strength across the first people cited as discussion partners and a slower, but continuing decline, across the fourth and fifth people cited. Order effects on closeness and contact frequency are described in the context of network size and relation content. There is a kinship bias only in deciding who to name first; spouses tended to be the first discussion partner cited and other kin tended not to be. There is a sex homophily bias across all respondents — people of one's own sex were cited as discussion partners before members of the opposite sex — but it emerged differently for men and women. Women, especially married women, expressed sex bias in the people with whom they spent time while men expressed sex bias in the people with whom they felt close. Men claimed closer relations with women than men but in fact listed their important discussion partners in descending order of closeness and began the list with the names of other men. Finally, there is evidence of a co-worker bias in discussion relations beyond the family; respondents tended to mention co-workers as daily contacts but late in their list of important discussion partners. With the exception of the spouse bias, all evidence of content bias is markedly weaker than the consistent tendency for respondents to list discussion relations in descending order of closeness and contact frequency.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 152 citations exist upstream.

References

1976Social Structure from Multiple Networks. II. Role Structures 1977The Structure of Adult Friendship Choices 1982To dwell among friends 1967Prestige and Association in an Urban Community.

Cited by

1998The content of the General Social Survey discussion networks: an exploration of General Social Survey discussion name generator in a Chinese context 1998Election Campaigns, Social Communication, and the Accessibility of Perceived Discussant Preference 2008Keeping in touch by technology 2002Reliability of Social Network Measurement Instruments 2010The relationship between networks, institutional development, and performance in foreign investments 2021On Social Media 2019Let’s Talk Sports: An Egocentric Discussion Network Analysis Regarding NFL Crisis Perceptions

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.