187 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2019
    1. ELIZABETHAN D,2NDFLOORWorkshop 2: Finding the Open Window: Constructing a Praxis of Inclusive Excellence in General Education

      is it too late?

    2. Session 27: Pathways to the Majors: Fostering Interdisciplinary Collaboration between Liberal Arts and Sciences and Professional SchoolsRecent national trends have led some t

      will go

    3. Session11: Funneling Faculty Dialogue: Promoting Intentionality, Transparency, and Assessment in General Education RedesignJuniata College recently compl

      maybe this one

    4. But I’m Just a Little Guy: Influencing General Education Institutional Change from the Grassroots

      will go to this one

  2. Nov 2017
    1. While the network society allows for ideas to be spread at a faster rate among a wider variety of people than ever before, it is unfortunately not the tool that will allow for the oppressed to bury their oppressors.

      I wonder if this is not the dialectic of the modern network society that is pushing for change?? I am thinking marx here.

    2. f a desire for dignity.

      This is powerful and important...how could we show this using Twitter data?

    1. pacts of the network society.  The Occupy movements showed networks of people standing up to capitalist institutions.  In the Movement for Black Lives, Black people are leading demands for structural change to the institutions that have oppressed and killed them for centuries.  However, the network society has also facilitated the public regrowth of hate groups such as the white supremacy movement.  

      I think this duality is what is most captivating and perplexing about the network society. Could this be the ying/yang of a society governed more by networks and less by bureaucracy?

    1. He, instead would see the envelopment of movements by corporations and governments as part of the collapse of the public sphere.

      Do you think the internet has facilitated this?

    1. The political economy of most social media corporations is now fueled by advertising; to be precise, by targeted advertising. Facebook, Google, and Twitter corporations dominate the social media advertising markets.

      a form of stalking? or fascism?

    1. This new society of information flows can use the internet to disrupt the power dynamics

      I also wonder if digital can work to consolidate power. We tend to think of disruption as a move towards more equality but what if it is a move towards fascism?

    1. Electronic communication is instantaneous and possible with anyone across the world.

      And can circumvent points of control and power making bureaucracies less important for command and control.

    2. breaks down some of the traditional social hierarchies and national borders because information flows almost anywhere

      Do you think networks are also breaking down bureaucracies?

  3. Oct 2017
    1. We also downloaded Twitter user profiles, such as the size offollowers, along with their profile description.

      I wonder how many profiles in the 3,389 tweets? Did the automate the review and capture of the details? Or did they review each profile by hand?

    2. Who are the central participants in the Twitter-based CoPs?RQ3:What healthcare roles are central in the Twitter-based CoPs?RQ4:Is the CoPs centralized and dominated by a few participants?RQ5:What are the characteristics of the interactions between different healthcare roles?

      Again, take note of these research questions. Look back at the literature review to observe how theory and research was used to set up the basis for these questions. When the answer is found, the theory/research will be used to interpret it and discuss the importance of the answer.

    3. What are the salient themes in health-related conversations via Twitter hashtags?

      Take note of this research question. It is a descriptive question but it is based in theory.

    4. To support the extraction of themes, we refer to existent content analysis studies regardingTwitter, with a focus on theInformation-Community-Actionframework which is developed todescribe organization-public communication (Lovejoy and Saxton 2012).Informationtweetscontain factual information,community-buildingtweets reflect social engagement, andactiontweets are explicit calls for taking actions

      Think of these as clusters. We will do cluster analysis in a week or so. These are attributes of nodes.

    5. studied the social network structure underlying Youtube videos

      I wonder what the methodology of this paper was?

    6. healthcare roles, yet thereis a considerable amount of conversations from healthcare providers to average consumers,and from average consumers to media

      these are node attributes. I wonder how they derived them from twitter. Hopefully this will be spelled out in the methods.

    1. edges as people and my nodes would be the connections between them. I

      I think you have this backwards; nodes are people connections are between them.

    1. identify as female in one group, and those that identify as male in the other.

      Are these males playing as females and females playing as females in each of these groups?

    1. is there a correlation between entities followed and status

      This is not really a SNA question...more a statistics question.

    2. This is not really a SNA question...more a statistics question.

    1. o all 30 of his or her alters, only the ties among alters are displayed.

      This is a subjective decision on how to display the data. You can make these decisions based on how you want to describe the network.

    2. ierarchical and nonhierarchical cluster analysi

      You will learn this in the second part of the class.

    3. he ego answered questionsabout the closeness among the alters on a 5-point Likert scale. For pur-poses of analysis, a tie between alters was considered to be present ifthey were classified as either very or moderately close

      Notice, the network is constructed through the perceptions of the ego. This is totally fine but it does require analytical attention.

    4. enumerated 30 individuals

      That is A LOT of people! Can you name 30 people with whom you had a relationship of some type in the past year?

    5. Thesefindings provide empirical evidence of distinct clustering of addictive behavior among youngadults and suggest the promise of social network-based interventions for this cohort.

      SNA is an excellent tool for intervention planning. By providing a map of the interactions, interventions can target specific locations in the network for change.

    1. This suggested that for this survivor, those feelings were the most powerful aspects of her experience.  

      This is an excellent use of SNA. I have never seen it used chronologically to map feelings. I love it!

    2. epresented the connections between aspects of the exam.

      I am not sure I understand this? Can you be more specific?

    3. The SNA approach allowed for more nuance in understanding the relationships than other analyses would have.

      Did they look at any outcomes of the different circuits? For example, did Circuit C have more successful prosecutions? Or less re victimization? Any way of measuring whether one network was better than another?

    4. used SNA to look at how the group norms are created and spread in the first place.

      Good! You are beginning to think about the usefulness of SNA as a tool AND as a way of asking research questions.

    5. his infographic briefly describes what these measures can tell us about the network.

      You need to briefly discuss the infographic to help the reader understand what it is saying. Just posting an image does not really connect it to the narrative.

    1. giant scam would be rewarding

      Begin to think about the network and relationship between EITHER churches or preachers. Do preachers live near each other? Children go to the same schools? How do they know each other beyond the church? Is there an annual meeting of preachers?

      Begin to ask yourself...where is the network? How do they link to one another? How do they know each other?

    2. onsidered a source, with churches he visits seen as targets.

      The churches should be the node and the preacher should be the link. How would you find out who speaks at which church? Is there a listing?

      Is there an online discussion group or Reddit group for these people?

    1. In this picture, it shows the degree centrality and the Eigenvector centrality in Social network

      Again, this does not really define the measures.

    2. In Social Network Analysis, a node is important when looking at relationships in a network. There are different types of node centrality and they each look at relationships in a network. There is degree centrality, which looks at he degree with nodes and edges, betweenness centrality which looks at the path in networks, closeness centrality which is the distance between nodes and eigenvector centrality which is a measure of a node.

      This section is vague and a bit repetitive. What exact does degree measure? What way is closeness influential? What specifically does betweenness focus on?

    1. multi-provider approach to patient care comes

      Patient outcomes seems key! I would also wonder about how this relates to the amount of care able to be delivered in the home since that has positive health outcomes.

    2. a strong tie between a patient and their doctor correlated with a longer hospital stay.

      Interesting...did it correlate at all with positive health outcomes?

    3. high degree of centrality

      This is a bit unclear...how was degree measured? More doctors?

    4. strength of the ties patients

      This is interesting...how was this measured?

    5. thinning of the network over time

      Why did the network thin? Less happiness? Not quite sure I understand the measurement here.

    6. size of the network, they can be used to determine the shape of the network.

      Node centrality does not really provide this information. This info is provided by structural measures. We turn to those after the small paper.

    7. node centrality measures examine the importance, connectivity, and centrality of individual nodes. 

      Yes. This is the correct way to understand the role of node centrality measures.

    1. women were more connected to active participants, does degree centrality tell the whole story? D

      Excellent question. Can you use this research methodology in your research? Does it give you any ideas?

    2. Degree centrality may be helpful for identifying the Sean King’s in your network, however it could also be responsible for finding the SpamBot78887’s and Lil B’s.

      Who are these people? Need context for the uncultured reader :-)!

    3. knowing which to use for your research question

      Excellent point! This is key!

    1. accines.

      Would love to see a personal conclusion where you reflect on this information as it has to do with your research or any other sociological observations.

    2. opinion leaders

      This is an example of a SNA theoretical construct used for measurement and research questions.

    3. mass medi

      I wonder what media they are consuming?

    1. cohesion during an on-field performances.

      I am not quite sure how team cohesion is being measured by the soccer picture? Where is the network? I see the path and I see a rendering of a play. Did the researchers look at the off field network? I am unclear on this.

    2. “closeness” to other nodes. This can be measured by either the in-degree (prominence of nodes) or out-degree (influential nodes) within a network.

      Closeness is not measured by 'in degree' or 'out degree'. Closeness is a centrality measure and can take into account the direction of a tie. But in degree and out degree are measures of degree.

    3. we know performance and cohesion are highly correlated

      Without references, 'we' don't know. The reader must take your word for it.

    4. performance will be.


    5. is

      'are' not 'is'

  4. Sep 2017
    1. The network is in person and virtual on all platforms in which resources are shared and gained.

      This seems a bit short. No real conclusion or analytical exploration. Need to do a bit more than describe. Connect to data. Research. Explore new questions. Discuss the impact of the theory on the lives of people.

    2. The question is if technology and the digital age has us dealing with an increase in social capital or social isolation?

      I think this is a critical question for the new subfield of digital sociology. What is the impact of the new online world on our corporeal lives? Good? Bad? Both?

    1. Do digital communities foster homogeneity between individuals that would not normally see each other as having commonality? Are they able to form bonds that they value for some amount of reciprocity?

      Could you detect this in a discussion forum? How could you define homogeneity in a way that could be measured via discussion?

    2. ultural ideology being that poor people have little to offer the rich.

      Excellent point. Has any research been done to compare the actual social networks of rich and poor kids? For example, asking a poor kid to name five people she would go to for advice and asking a rich kid the same question. Has that been done?

    3. Coexisting, but rarely (if ever touching).

      Good point. How can we quantify this? Can you include some data to show how we are leading parallel lives?

    1.  To my knowledge, social network analysis has never been a part of the evaluation of these types of programs.

      Is this your project? I could imagine a knowledge diffusion question. If someone goes through this program, how many people do they influence?

    2. This makes the decision making process of whether or not to intervene, and in what way to intervene, different for those with high versus low social capital.

      Again, any research? If not, can you do it?

    3. network norms shape people’s attitudes and behaviors in ways that can support and/or oppose violence and abuse.  In networks where social norms are tolerant of abuse, individuals who speak out against it pay a price in social capital.

      Is there data on this? What research has been done looking at networks and bystander intervention behaviors and/or beliefs? This would be a very interesting project.

    1. , it would, but because their networks do not often cross, the gap between social connectedness of the rich and the poor continues to grow

      Yes! This is the cost of geographical, educational and social marginalization. Different economic groups travel in different circles which reproduces their current economic position.

    2. social capital offline only helps those who currently have high levels of economic and symbolic capital.

      Again, I think the theoretical point behind social capital is that all relationships can have some value but it is also to show how some connections have more value than others. Certainly, knowing your neighbor or sharing stories with the clerk at the 7-11 is helpful to those how live in poverty. But, for those who are born at the top, they know the head of the corporations so the pay off is bigger. Both pay off but one pays off more.

    3. social ties, is a significant reason. His children, by no virtue of their own but solely because of their social ties with him, are also in positions of high power and prestige and have astronomical amounts of money.

      I am not sure this is the best example of social capital in that these are family relationships not social relationships. I think the idea of social capital is to show that other relationships beyond family or blood have value.

    4. If communities have changed, becoming more global and less connected offline, how does social capital transfer in this new age?

      I think this is one of the central questions of the new subfield of Digital Sociology.

    1. o those in the population who currently lack it, we can then examine how their social network changes, and how their social capital is impacted. 

      This is an excellent research question! Does access and use of social media improve the mental and emotional health of older people/

    2. In fact, it has been argued that the networks that offer the sort of social capital that could transition into economic capital are insular, and quite hard to become a part of. 

      Where? Can you provide a citation?

    3. of belonging to those who may otherwise feel isolated.  Transgender teenagers, for example, are able to find support and understanding

      These are empirical assertions. Provide data to support this point.

    4. remote connections comprise a social network that offers a degree of social capital without some of the demands that go along with social networks in closer quarters.

      What are the benefits of this? In terms of cost/benefit, if these ties pay off just as well as in person ties without the expending of as much time and labor, is that a net positive? Or is something lost in the ease of contact? Again, what does data say?

    5. We do not rely on neighbors and geographically convenient groups and organizations to piece together our social networks as heavily as we once did. 

      Do we know this for sure? Or is this our perception? What does data say?

    1. economy of that friendship

      What is an economy of friendship? Your term?

    2. As Portes (2002) indicates, perhaps Putnam’s error is in treating an egocentric measure such as social capital in such a way that it could be measured like GDP, which certainly seems like some sort-of methodological fallacy, or maybe it’s just a good old case of rose tinted hindsight glasses, and while I’m certainly not going to disagree with the premise that high measurements of social capital are a positive indicator for any given individual, I don’t think Putnam’s writing has a lot of explanatory power relative to the political world.

      big sentence! The issue with Putnam is a question of level of analysis. Can an individual level measure describe a social system? But don't we do that all the time. This society is more or less healthy based on aggregate measures of individual health?

    3. people as politically engaged as they’ve ever been


    1. Does assigning students to teams build a “better” network (activate more capital) than letting students choose their own teams?

      This also may be a question of homophily vs heterogenity. Students pick probably more homogeneous groups. Do they produce a 'better' outcome?

    2. encourage students to activate their ties

      Are these students building social capital? Do these ties follow them outside the class? Do they draw on these ties for other purposes?

    3. other teams seated nearby

      You also have a lot of smaller networks embedded in the larger network. It might be interesting so map how each group interacts, i.e. leader or democratic or something else to see which kind produces a 'better' outcome.

    1. ource: Emerald Group Publishing

      don't understand this visual? How does it relate?

    2. creation of social capital”.

      How did they define this?

    3. find homophily in our networks.

      Almost too easy and it does not push us towards difference.

    4. weak ties in our digital connections or networks,

      Are weak ties now more important than strong ties for seeking and finding social support? I am thinking of discussion boards/forums.

    5. How would their analysis of social networks and social capital change if they were here today?

      This is a new line of research and theory!!

    1. Along these lines, I would argue that it is difficult to measure online participation with social capital. An individual might use digital devices to play Solitaire. Alternatively, the individual might be heavily involved in moderating a Dancing with the Stars community forum or enjoy playing a massively multiplayer online game that requires group coordination.

      These are the new questions raised by the digital world. What does digital social capital look like? Have our new ways of interacting replaced bowling? Are we still as social only in different ways?

    2. few neighbors refuse

      Or how many non-participants does it take to fracture the community and/or network?

    1. Social capital, as fraught and divided as the literature may be, is ultimately just a concept; and a relatively underdeveloped one, at that. It is neither benevolent nor vengeful, and perhaps what the literature describes as social capital activation says more about the theoretical dispositions of the researchers than the concept itself.

      I would love to see you submit this to the new DigiSoc@VCU Medium.com page. You would need to strengthen the conclusions. You discuss is so very powerful up until the end. The it falls a bit flat. What are the implications of this new form of digital social capital? Are there other ways of mapping and measuring it? How can SNA advance this literature? What research questions come out of the alt-right study? These are the type of questions you should explore in your conclusions.

    1. Discussion

      I am disappointed they did not present a sociogram of the network. An image of the network would have been MUCH more helpful in being able to conceptualize their points.

    2. symmetrically while the expertnetwork data were treated asymmetrically.

      Symmetrically = no direction Asymmetrically = direction of the ties

    3. find out something they did not understandabout the marine environment.

      Indicates directionality of the tie and strength.

    4. snowball sampling method where we initially asked 17 re-spondents about their social and expert networks. This in-volved asking informants to name the seven most importantpersons in their lives, starting with the most important, outsideoftheir household

      Think about this for your own research. Pay attention to the methods so you can begin to think about how you will collect your own data.

    5. knowledge het-erogeneity. Factors such as age, gender, livelihood, residence,education, household income, and integration into the marketeconomy have been shown to correlate with variation

      Weak ties also induces heterogeneity in knowledge.

    6. mphasize its normative, shared,inter-generationally transmitted characteristics rather than itsheterogeneity, emergence, and practical application.

      I wonder about weak vs strong ties. This strikes me as a difference, i.e. heterogeneity. I also wonder about knowledge network analysis...maybe this is about how knowledge travels.

    1. gral to network diffusion.

      How so? Can you expand here a bit?

    2. dive too much into the small world theory, let’s review some key SNA concepts.

      I LOVE LOVE LOVE this. It tells me you have a purpose to your blog post. You have an audience in mind and you understand the goal here is to communicate beyond the academy to inform a broader public. This is what public sociology is all about! Excellent!

    1. Six degrees of separation says that we can be linked to any one person by six people

      FB finds we are separated by 3.5 degrees of separation!

    2. someone who works there who knows one of my friends

      Why a small world here? Does the friend live far away? Thinking about the ways in which details matter to really demonstrate a point.

    1. strong versus weak for these scientists

      Could this be a central question for your NSF grant?

    2. ccording to this blog,

      When I read this blog, I thought about how knowledge comes to mature academics. When we are junior, we spend a great deal of time reading the specifics of articles and texts. Do we do the same as senior academics? Or does knowledge come to us via our networks? We talk to people at conferences or exchange ideas via email or other digital means? Just wondering if knowledge networks change over the life course of an academic?

    3. job depends more on people to who we are weakly tied rather than strongly tied.

      This is the entire premise of LinkedIn. I wonder if Granovetter gets a cut of the LinkedIn profits?

    1. weak ties make the social networks unique.

      I like this statement. Can we think of uniqueness as also diversity? Do those who benefit most from weak ties have more diverse ties?

    2. fully integrate into the society.

      I wonder if people with social anxiety fear weak ties more? What is the psychological relationship between strong and weak ties? I also wonder about social mobility--do those at the higher levels have more weak ties? Spend more time on their weak ties?

    3. Six Degrees of Separation Anxiety

      I wonder if those who are more aware of their weak ties or have more contact with more ties have higher or lower social anxiety? We always think of social support as a net positive but is there such a thing as too much?

    4. six degrees of separation

      FB used its data to show 3.5 degrees of separation!

    1. weak ties has forever altered how we approach the world

      What do you think some of those changes are? Do you think we recognize the number and value of our weak ties differently than we did prior to social media?

    2. us we have a one step connection to every continent

      This could be a small paper study!

    3. weak ties.

      TRUE! We can't know everyone REALLY well. In fact, we have more weak ties than strong.

    4. five people, or six steps

      FB research shows that we are connected by about 3.5 steps! I wonder if the world is getting smaller?

    1. data is descriptive


    2. ocial networks is relational data

      This is different than traditional social science which focuses on independent and dependent variables. For SNA, all data is related to all other data; no variables are mutually exclusive. This is why SNA is fundamentally descriptive.

    3. look at the edges, the connections between the nodes.

      This is what we mean with the term 'sociological imagination'. Theory allows us to 'see' below the surface of society and to understand the invisible network of norms, values, structures, institutions and systems of inequality that shape individual choice and behavior. In this way, SNA should be fundamental to sociological methods.

    4. entire graph

      We will be doing this in the second half of the class. The first part looks at nodal metrics.

    5. network

      Network should be the Time word of the decade!

    1. is important to them

      Bystander intervention could be contagious much like other healthy or unhealthy behavior is; we know obesity is contagious. Bystander intervention could travel as well.

    2. analytic shift

      It is an analytic shift that requires you to rethink how you ask research questions. Questions are more descriptive than predictive.

    3. between them

      This space is fundamental to sociological theory. It the place where social forces exert power in the lives of individuals. SNA seeks to capture that influence and power.

    4. visible is not as effective as addressing the entire system

      Sociologists use the term 'sociological imagination' which refers to our ability to 'see' below the surface of society and to understand the invisible network of norms, values, structures, institutions and systems of inequality that shape individual choice and behavior.

    1. positive and negative outcomes

      What type of outcomes can SNA be used for? Thinking about this will help you think about research questions.

    2. descriptive analysis

      The challenge of descriptive research for traditional social scientists is the change in how questions are asked. Questions should focus on describing something in a deep and informative way. Traditional social science relies more on predictive and inferential analysis. Can I predict what will happen if this variable changes in this way? Research questions identify the independent and dependent variables. SNA does not have IV and DV so questions are more about revealing what is going on underneath; i.e. how do the members of corporations know each other?

    3. the connections between the individuals and groups are studied. T

      The space between individuals is where the social capital resides. Where peer pressure occurs. Where norms are exchanged and regulated. It is an important space :-)!

    4. crucial for professional development.

      But does it actually work? What does the data say? Can SNA be used to answer that question?

    1. this is still how social network analysis works with predictive analysis.

      Can you expand here?

    2. tudies the relationships we have

      I am a bit confused here...SNA focuses directly on the space between individuals. Our relationships live in this space. Traditional social science looks at the characteristics of individuals to see if they vary according to another variable, i.e. independent and dependent variables. There are no IV and DV in SNA, at least in basic SNA. More advanced SNA blends statistics and SNA data.

    1. challenging for those using SNA.

      It is the blessing and the curse of SNA--it can do so much but it can also do too much. The analyst has to be clear in their question, defining what is a node and what is a link. It can get even trickier since nodes and links can also be reversed. Sometimes a node can be a link and a link can also be a node!

    2. who we associate with, and understanding the impact of those relationships increases

      This is fundamental to sociology as a discipline. We call it peer pressure, social support, social capital, norms, etc. This is why many who use SNA see it as the best methodology for doing sociology.

    3. push or pull factors

      in-degree and out-degree

    4. networks the individual is a part of may have impacted that action.

      The focus of analysis is on the space between the individuals, i.e. the air, rather than on the character or traits of the individual. The traits and character can be used to understand what is going on in the relationship but SNA measures the links not the nodes.

    1. RPD has included social network analysis within their toolkit.

      Haha...Mike and I did the training for the RPD!

    2. interaction of two actors.

      Excellent! Therefore SNA requires three points of data--Node A, Node B and the link between them. There is no dependent and independent variable. The means there is no inferential or predictive questions. Questions are more descriptive and comparative.

    3. social relationships as a primary concern

      While traditional social science focuses on the characteristics of the individual, SNA takes the idea of social pressure and social forces seriously and analyzes the space in between individuals, i.e. the 'air'.

    1. Rush Limbaugh is a node in this network with very high connectivity!

      Could Rush be a link not a node?

    2. nsulated from the other network

      Can we demonstrate this with data?

    3. other network includes climate change deniers.

      What a great way of using SNA to compare two competing ways of knowing. How would you collect data to show the different flow of information through these networks? What what would you be looking for? What would the node be? The link?

    1. nvestigate the networks in the modern society

      I think this is the main methodology for digital sociology. We just don't know it yet.

    2. not be useful in making any inferences

      SNA requires three points of data: Node A, Node B and a link between them. The focus of analysis is on the link such that A and B are not independent. Predictive requires an independent and a dependent variable.

    3. networks are strongly influenced by us and we are as strongly influenced by our networks

      This is what the word recursive means. When we say something is recursive it means mutually reinforcing over time.

    4. how they influence our lives, and how individual behavior is shaped by these networks.

      Networks are what sociologists talk about all the time but our methods don't fully 'see' them. We find relationships between variables--i.e. race and class--and then discuss how this relationship is due to social forces. Networks are the way in which social forces exert power!

    1. relational data

      There are three points of data in SNA; node A, node B and the link between them. Traditional social science requires only two--independent variable and dependent variable.

    2. contort

      It is this contortion that will make it hard to ask SNA driven research questions. You must think about describing patterns rather than making predictions.

    3. all tied together

      This is what makes SNA so different. Usual sociological analysis holds the individual as the unit of analysis. Even when looking at the institutional level, the unit is usually the individual. SNA asks you to see, analyze and conceptualize the space between individuals, i.e. air.

    1. two different

      It also reveals the distance between formal norms and informal norms; theory vs. practice.

    2. weak ties influence us or our networks?

      Think of this question in Week #3 when you read 'strength of weak ties'. Do people with large FB networks have better job prospects?

    3. research questions including:

      Your challenge will be to make these type of questions more specific and relevant to digital sociology.

    4. unit of study

      This is what makes SNA so different. Usual sociological analysis holds the individual as the unit of analysis. Even when looking at the institutional level, the unit is usually the individual. SNA asks you to see, analyze and conceptualize the space between individuals, i.e. air.

    1. t is possible to identify a wide variety of actors who have contributed to ashift towards, and/or reproduced, academic capitalism:

      Each of these could be a network. You could compare the networks to see if they are structured differently as a way of trying to understand who is most responsible for the push towards Academic Capitalism.

    2. knowledge-based economy

      What do we mean by knowledge based economy?

    1. not living.

      Why are they not living? They are certainly dynamic, have needs, pressures and structures and exist beyond the singular person?

    2. economic inequalities through nepotism

      It also may be that certain ways in which networks function produce and reproduce inequality. See Power Law question.

    3. molded by our social connections

      Isn't this the foundation of the sociological imagination? Why is SNA not more central to sociological methods?

    4. friend’s friend’s friend’s

      This is called the horizon of visibility. We generally know who are friends friends are but it is really hard to know who are friends friends friends are. SNA and the internet give us sight beyond the horizon. I wonder if that makes a difference in our choices or social capital?

    1. patterns

      That there are patterns in the structures of networks that cut across nature, people and technology makes me wonder about human control, free will and agency. Is life controlled by networks rather institutions, culture and choice?

    2. friends of our friends’ friends.  

      This is called the horizon of visibility. We can see our friends friends but it is really hard to know who our friends friends friends are.

    3. advent of the internet

      The internet has revealed what has always been the fabric of society--human networks. It has made it easier to see them and understand how deeply we are embedded in them.

    1. the discipline aims to identify the key actors within networks, where influence is concentrated in these networks, and how that influence is disseminated.

      SNA also gives you the ability to see beyond your social horizon. It is easy to know our friends friends but it is very hard to know our friends friends friends. Much less our friends friends friends friends. But do they influence us in some way? How many steps out does influence remain? Is there a way to measure this in your small paper?

    2. heart of sociological thought is the belief that we are all  a part of a vast tapestry of social connections.

      As I think about this, I am always a bit perplexed as to why SNA is not more foundational to Sociology. SNA reveals that which is very fabric of our society. Why is is not more utilized as a methodology? I suspect it has something to do with how hard it is to collect data.

    1. aspect of an average person’s life to very soundly prove their point.

      These outcomes have been linked to friends and social contacts. Research asks how many friends or how often do you socialize? While this hints at the issue of networks, asking for lists or numbers does not produce network data. You have to find the links between people and between those people that people know.

    2. just how important our social networks are to every aspect of our lives

      Social networks are like 'air'; they surround us and we don't even see them. To me, this is what makes the methodology of SNA harder to grasp; how to access the data for 'air'? How to understand the discreet influence of 'air'? But once you see it, you can't unsee it! Very powerful!

    1. something like this picture….

      Networks are like 'air'; they are all around us constantly. This class will not only help you see networks but also to see the complexity of them. They are growing more complex and more important to how our society functions. I often wonder if networks are not replacing institutions.

    2. encounter we make, relationship we build, or key-stroke on our technological device builds a network.

      This is what is called 'native data'; data that is built through everyday behaviors.

    1. ask people to list those in their social circles who have intervened in abusive situations, people they have talked to about bystander intervention, or people whose opinion on intervening is important to them.

      What would be the links between these people? If you asked someone to list their friends, you will get lists which produce a star network. There needs to be a second round of questions involving friends of friends. Getting network data requires asking interrelated people.

    2. ystander behaviors can tell us there is a difference, but not much more.

      How would you analyze this via SNA? What networks would shape bystander intervention? Networks at the party? Personal or friendship networks? Networks on campus? Could you think about doing something on this for your small paper?

    3. individuals, groups, or systems.

      This perspective of looking at individuals in categories is the foundation of statistics--two variables that are mutually exclusive and the goal is to see if they relate in any way. SNA is very different--all variables are related and dependent. That is why SNA is descriptive--can't do predictive without mutually exclusive variables.

    4. what you see on the surface (individuals or bamboo shoots) is connected by a complicated path that run just below the surface (relationships between people or the root system of the bamboo plant).  

      I think this is why we are so fascinated by social media; it has revealed what has always been under the surface. To me, networks are like 'air'; all around us but hard to see. SNA reveals the air.

    1. nequality

      We will discuss how networks can produce and reproduce inequality. It is called the power law.

    2. mainstream pundits with more legitimacy

      This is what is so hard about democracy in the modern digital age. Habermas tells us that democracy requires an open and free exchange of idea in a equally accessible public space. While the internet is not entirely open, free and equally accessible, it is very close. Yet, we have lost the ability to vet, validate and trust most information. What does that mean about democracy in the modern age?

    3. ommon knowledge

      I think this is why they are hard to analyze...it is like trying to see and understand air. It is everywhere so it feels so normal and invisible. Networks, particularly human networks are the same. Humans have always been embedded in networks; we live, thrive and die in networks. They are another form of 'air'. The difference is that today, social media has made them more visible. We can now see them and analyze them in new ways. Hence, why this class is online :-)

    4. These connections are canon for us; the idea that someone could live life not seeing them, that the recognition of them is groundbreaking, is a sight to see.

      I agree. These ideas are foundational for sociology! When I lecture in Intro to Socy, I spend a great deal of time on trying to help them grasp the fundamentals of the sociological imagination. While network theory may seem like common sense, it directly challenges the ideology of individualism and pull yourself up by your bootstraps. If you accept that others influence you, then you have to begin to accept the realities of privilege and discrimination. This can often be too much cognitively, particularly for privileged students who prefer to think of their benefits as wholly earned. SNA reveals how inequality is produced and reproduced.

    1. connected teenagers  had decreased feelings of well-being. T

      I think this is a central question of our age--does social media make us happier? Increase democracy? Smarter? And the question always changes because the technology always changes. I now wonder about SnapChat. It functions a bit differently but with the same goal of connection. Does it produce better feelings than FB? Worse? More vicitimization? Less?

    2. However, I believe that the humans experience includes some unpredictability. How would unpredictable behavior manifest in a social network? How do new unconventional new ideas emerge? What goes on in the first person that starts a new trend in the network?

      Use these questions to drive what article you bring in to annotate. Or bring them into the reflection. The questions you are asking focus on dynamic network analysis. We will not do any of that in this class but you can find a lot of work on this way of doing SNA via Google.

    3. whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

      When I lecture in Intro to Socy, I spend a great deal of time on this statement to help them grasp the fundamentals of the sociological imagination. While network theory may seem like common sense, it directly challenges the ideology of individualism and pull yourself up by your bootstraps. If you accept that others influence you, then you have to begin to accept the realities of privilege and discrimination. This can often be too much cognitively, particularly for privileged students who prefer to think of their benefits as wholly earned. SNA reveals how inequality is produced and reproduced.

    4. Social networks shape the choices that we make whether we’re conscious or unconscious of them.

      I think this is why they are hard to analyze...it is like trying to see and understand air. It is everywhere so it feels so normal and invisible. Networks, particularly human networks are the same. Humans have always been embedded in networks; we live, thrive and die in networks. They are another form of 'air'. The difference is that today, social media has made them more visible. We can now see them and analyze them in new ways. Hence, why this class is online :-)

    5. a phone calls and mail. Now, it might mean instantaneous connection via apps

      Is there a way to compare what these networks look like? Could you compare the friendship network of a grandparent, parent and child? And compare the ways in which they maintain those networks? I would also include a strength of ties. I could see the grandparent having stronger ties but fewer. The child having more but weaker. Just thinking of ideas for your small paper.

    1. party and we don’t know anyone there, that humans have a desire to talk to each other

      Is this an idea for your small paper? How have others mapped and measured what interactions take place at social gatherings? Could you reproduce this for your small paper?

    2. it shows the six degrees of separation.

      What SNA will help with is not only creating visuals of networks but providing metrics to be able to understand the different roles and positions each nodes plays in the network as well as comparing different network structures.

    3. networks are everywhere,

      I think this is why they are hard to analyze...it is like trying to see and understand air. It is everywhere so it feels so normal and invisible. Networks, particularly human networks are the same. Humans have always been embedded in networks; we live, thrive and die in networks. They are another form of 'air'. The difference is that today, social media has made them more visible. We can now see them and analyze them in new ways. Hence, why this class is online :-)

    1. clustering effect.

      This is also the power law; it takes links to get links. Power law is how inequality produced and reproduced in networks. Check it out!

    2. repeat the behavior

      I wonder if you can repeat this experiment in some limited way for your small paper? Only digitally. Has anyone done this?

    3. this is common sense.

      I too believe this is common sense. This is why I am always struck by how tightly people hold to the 'pull yourself up by your bootstaps' model of thinking. It also reveals how you can tell ideology from practice. Those who profess the bootstraps also move their children to good schools and neighborhoods b/c they know this is common sense. Does this make sense?

    4. people’s behavior and emotions are affected by the people that they know, the people that those people know, and so on – in other words, by the social network which an individual is integrated in

      This is the essence of sociology. And is the fundamental challenge to the logic of individualism and neoliberalism.

    1. new framework for understanding issues ranging from democracy on the web to the vulnerability of the internet and the spread of deadly viruses

      Sometimes this new framework feels a bit overwhelming to me because it asks me to 'see' the world differently. I am use to seeing through discreet categories containing individuals; i.e. race, class and gender. SNA is asking me to see it through interconnections and links--the stuff behind the categories. Sometimes it feels like I am being asked to see 'air'; I know it is there, but it is all around me--ubiquitous--which makes it harder, and more intellectually challenging, to see.

    1. similarities between the two

      It would be interesting to discuss these similarities. From my non-chemist brain, I see more pattern and regularity in the chemical than in the social. Reminds me of NDTyson quote that physics is easy and sociology is hard because of the nonlinearity of human behavior.

    2. probability law

      Sociologically, this law of networks is how inequality is built in and reproduced, i.e. it takes money to make money. People gravitate to those who already have connections, power or influence which gives those people more power, connections and influence.

    3. power-law rather than a Gaussian distribution

      Do you know how to measure power law? I have some data that I am sure follows a power law because of the curve of the line. I don't know how to calculate it. I am just eyeballing it. Is there a better way?

  5. Aug 2017
    1. SNA Data Structures

      I will be posting videos for the next week on Sunday. Look for an active link each Sunday.


      more directions on how to do this are forthcoming