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
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

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

  • from II - Early Foundations
  • Edited by Mario L. Small, Harvard University, Massachusetts, Brea L. Perry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Bernice Pescosolido, Indiana University, Bloomington, Edward B. Smith, Northwestern University, Illinois
  • Book:
    Personal Networks
    Published online:
    01 October 2021
    Print publication:
    16 September 2021, pp 87-97

  • 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.