Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:06:05.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - From J. Clyde Mitchell, “The Concept and Use of Social Networks”

from II - Early Foundations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2021

Edited by
Mario L. Small ,
Brea L. Perry ,
Bernice Pescosolido  and
Edward B. Smith
Mario L. Small
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Massachusetts
Brea L. Perry
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Bernice Pescosolido
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Edward B. Smith
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Get access

Summary

A reflection on J. Clyde Mitchell’s (1969) classic piece “The concept and use of social networks”. In the piece, Mitchell lays out the “known world” of social network analysis, discussing fundamental concepts, theory and methods. Looked at 50 years later, we see much that is core to how we think about networks today, but we also see some differences. Network perspectives today are often associated with a structuralist sensibility that emphasizes opportunities and constraints and de-emphasizes meanings and agency. In contrast, Mitchell plays up opportunities and agency and is very interested in meanings and relational norms. His view of relationships as micro-contexts for interpreting interactions is interesting and has bearing on several “modern” areas of research, including dormant ties (Levin, Walter and Murnighan 2011), situationally activated networks (Smith, Menon and Thompson 2012) and network dynamics.

Keywords

Clyde Mitchellhistory of network analysisnetwork conceptsnetworks and meanings
Type
Chapter
Information
Personal Networks
Classic Readings and New Directions in Egocentric Analysis
 , pp. 87 - 97
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aldous, Joan, and Straus, Murray A.. 1966. “Social Networks and Conjugal Roles: A Test of Bott’s Hypothesis.” Social Forces 44: 577–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, John A. 1954. “Class and Committee in a Norwegian Island Parish.” Human Relations 7: 39–58.Google Scholar
Beshers, James, and Laumann, Edward. 1967. “Social Distance: A Network Approach.” American Sociological Review 32: 141–5.Google Scholar
Bott, Elizabeth. 1955. “Urban Families: Conjugal Roles and Social Networks.” Human Relations 8: 345–85.Google Scholar
Bott, Elizabeth. 1956. “Urban Families: The Norms of Conjugal Roles.” Human Relations 9: 325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bott, Elizabeth. 1957. Family and Social Networks. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Dorwin, and Zander, Alvin, (eds.). 1960. Group Dynamics: Research and Theory, 2nd ed. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.Google Scholar
Coleman, James, Katz, Elihu, and Menzel, Herbert. 1957. “The Diffusion of an Innovation among Physicians.” Sociometry 20: 253–70.Google Scholar
Epstein, Arnold L. 1961. “The Network and Urban Social Organization.” Rhodes-Livingstone Journal 29: 29–62.Google Scholar
Festinger, Leon, Schachter, Stanley, and Back, Kurt. 1950. Social Pressures in Informal Groups. New Yorker: Harper.Google Scholar
Firth, Raymond. 1954. “Social Organization and Social Change.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 84: 1–20.Google Scholar
Harary, Frank, Norman, Robert Z., and Cartwright, Dorwin. 1965. Structural Models: An Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Jay, Edward J. 1964. “The Concepts of ‘Field’ and ‘Network’ in Anthropological Research.” Man 64: 137–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Fred E. 1966. “Occupation Contact Network.” Social Forces 28: 237–52.Google Scholar
Loomis, Charles P. 1967. “Change in Rural India as Related to Social Power and Sex.” Behavioral Sciences and Community Development 1: 1–27.Google Scholar
Loomis, Charles P., Morales, J. O., Clifford, R. A., and Leonard., O. E. 1953. Turrialba: Social Systems and the Introduction of Change. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, Adrian. 1966. “The Significance of Quasi-Groups in the Study of Complex Societies,” pp. 97–122 in The Social Anthropology of Complex Societies, ASA Monographs 4, edited by Banton, M.. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
Mayer, Philip. 1961. Tribesmen or Townsmen: Conservatism and the Process of Urbanization in a South African City. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, Philip. 1962. “Migrancy and the Study of Africans in Towns.” American Anthropologist 64(3): 576–92.Google Scholar
Mayer, Philip. 1964. “Labour Migrancy and the Social Network.” In Problems of Transition: Proceedings of the Social Sciences Research Conference, vol. 1962, pp. 21–34.Google Scholar
Mitchell, James C. 1959. “The Study of African Urban Social Structures.” Presented at Housing and Urbanization Inter-African Conference, 2nd Session. Nairobi: Publication No. 47, CCTA.Google Scholar
Nelson, Joel I. 1966. “Clique contacts and family orientations.” American Sociological Review 31: 663–672.Google Scholar
Pauw, Berthold A. 1963. The Second Generation. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1952. Structure and Function in Primitive Society: Essays and Addresses. London: Cohen and West.Google Scholar
Reader, D. H. 1964. “Models in Social Change with Special Reference to Southern Africa.” African Studies 23: 11–33.Google Scholar
Turner, Christopher. 1967. “Conjugal roles and social networks: A re-examination of an hypothesis.” Human Relations 20(2): 121–130.Google Scholar
Udry, J. Richard, and Hall, Mary. 1965. “Marital Role Segregation and Social Networks in Middle-Class, Middle-Aged Couples.” Journal of Marriage and Family Living 27(3): 392–5.Google Scholar
van Velsen, Jaap. 1964. The Politics of Kinship. Manchester: Manchester University Press for the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute.Google Scholar
van Velsen, Jaap. 1967. “The Extended Case Method and Situational Analysis,” pp. 129–49 in The Craft of Social Anthropology, edited by Epstein, A. L.. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×