An Introduction to the Social Side of Analysis

Barry Wellman Director, NetLab Centre for Urban & Studies University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A1 [email protected] www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman NetLab Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Possible C.S. Fallacies

Only online counts Groupware NE Networkware HCI: Only two-person interactions matter Can build small world systems All ties are the same; all relationships are the same Social network software support social networks Size matters – Linked In No need to analyze networks

3 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

In a Sentence –––

“To Discover How A, Who is in Touch with B and C, Is Affected by the Relation Between B & C” John Barnes (anthropologist)

“The is Hard. The Computer Science is Easy.” Bill Buxton (UofT, PARC, MSR)

4 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

What is a Social Network?

as the patterned organization of network members & their relationships Old Def: When a computer network connects people or organizations, it is a social network Now ported over to more ambiguous cases: web networks; citation networks, etc.

5 Three Ways to Look at Reality

Categories All Possess One or More Properties as an Aggregate of Individuals Examples: Men, Developed Countries Groups (Almost) All Densely-Knit Within Tight Boundary Thought of as a Solidary Unit (Really a Special Network) Family, Workgroup, Community Networks Set of Connected Units: People, Organizations, Networks Can Belong to Multiple Networks Examples: Friendship, Organizational, Inter-Organizational, World-System, Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Nodes, Relationships & Ties Nodes: A Unit That Possibly is Connected Individuals, Households, Workgroups,Organizations, States Relationships (A Specific Type of Connection) A “Role Relationship” Gives Emotional Support To Links Web Page To Attacks Ties (Contain One or More Relationships) Friendship (with possibly many relationships) Affiliations (Person – Organization) Works for IBM; ACM Member; Football Team One-Mode, Two-Mode Networks

7 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman A Network is More Than The Sum of Its Ties

A Network Consists of One or More Nodes Could be Persons, Organizations, Groups, Nations, Web Connected by One or More Ties Could be One or More Relationships That Form Distinct, Analyzable Patterns Can Study Patterns of Relationships OR Ties Emergent Properties

8 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Short History UofT/ICS: Prof. Bott 1920s J.L. Moreno – Sociometry 1930s Anthropology, Post WWII 1950s Detribalization, Migration, Cold War Qualitative Analysis – Africa, UK (Eliz Bott) Survey Research - New Community Forms 1960s Small Groups Analysis (Centrality, Transitivity) 1960s Role Analysis / Block Modeling 1970s Interlocking Corporate Ties – 1970s Social Movements - Why Riot? 1970s Collaborative Networks / Citation Analysis 1980s Online Networks 2000s Web Networks 2000s Social Software 2000s 9 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Short History of INSNA

International Network for Informal conferences in mid-late 1970s Toronto (1978); Hawaii Formalized as Sunbelt 1981 – annual Normal Rotation: SE US, US West, Europe Vancouver (May 06); Greece (May 07); SE US (Feb 08) Always Informal, But Serious Work Grown from 175 to 800 Members 1500 on Listserv (Not Limited to Members) Website: www.insna.org; also ucinet.org

10 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Journals

Connections , 1977 Informal journal: “Useful” articles, news, gossip, grants, abstracts, book summaries Social Networks , 1978? Formal journal: Refereed articles, book essays Journal of Social Structure , 2000? Online, Lots of visuals Articles Appear Occasionally when their time has come

11 10 Minute Overview –––Key Books Elizabeth Bott, Family & Social Network, 1957 J. Clyde Mitchell, Networks, Norms & Institutions, 1973 Mark Granovetter, Getting a Job, 1974 Holland & Leinhardt, Perspectives on Social Network Research, 1979 S. D. Berkowitz, An Introduction to Structural Analysis, 1982 Knoke & Kuklinski, Network Analysis, 1983, Sage, low-cost , Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons, 1984 Wellman & Berkowitz, eds., Social Structures , 1988 David Knoke, Political Networks, 1990 John Scott, Social Network Analysis, 1991 Ron Burt, Structural Holes, 1992 Manuel Castells, The Rise of Network Society, 2 nd ed. 2000 Barry Wellman, Networks in the Global Village, 1999 Wasserman & Faust, Social Network Analysis, 1992 , (monograph & reader), 2001 Barry Wellman, Caroline Haythornthwaite, The Internet in Everyday Life, 2002 Duncan Watts, Six Degrees, 2003 Wooter de Nouy, Andrej Mrvar & Vladimir Batagelj, Pajek Patrick Doriean, Vladimir Batagelj, Anuška Ferligoj. Generalized Blockmodeling 10 Minute Overview –––Software 1) UCINet – Whole Network Analysis 1) Lin Freeman, Steve Borgatti, Martin Everett 2) Pajek – Whole and Ego-centered Network Analysis 3) MultiNet – Whole Network Analysis 1) + Nodal Characteristics. Bill Richards 4) P*Star – Dyadic Analysis – Stan Wasserman 5) R, GUESS , etc. 6) Ego-Centered Network Analysis 1) SPSS/SAS – See Wellman, et al. “How To…” papers 10 Minute Overview –––Data Basis Small Group “““Sociometry“SociometrySociometry””””1930s > (Moreno, Bonacich, Cook) Finding People Who Enjoy Working Together Evolved into Exchange Theory, Small Group Studies Ethnographic Studies, 1950s > (Mitchell, Barnes) Does Modernization > Disconnection? Survey Research: Personal Networks, 1970s > Community, Support & Social Capital, “Guanxi” Mathematics & Simulation, 1970s > (Freeman, White) Formalist / Methods & Substantive Analysis Survey & Archival Research, Whole Nets, 1970s > Organizational, Inter-Organizational, Inter-National Analyses Political Structures, 1970s > (Tilly, WallersteinWallerstein)))) Social Movements, Mobilization (anti Alienation) World Systems (asymmetric structure > Globalization) Computer Networks as Social Networks, late 1990s > (Sack) Automated Data Collection Web Networks > Bernardo Huberman , Duncan Watts Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Social Software

Social Software Friendster, Orkut, Visible Path, Wallop, MySpace Managing Your Network Managing Your Organization’s Network -- IKNOW Interlinking Networks Rarely Have Network Analytic Tools

15 The Multiple Ways of Network Analysis

Method – The Most Visible Manifestation Misleading to Confuse Appearance with Reality Data Gathering Data Base -- Friendster, etc. Theory – Pattern Matters Substance Community, Organizational, Inter-Organizational, Terrorist, World System An AddAdd----On:On: Add a Few Network Measures to a Study Integrated Approach A Way of Looking at the World: Theory, Data Collection, Data Analysis, Substantive Analysis Links to Structural Analyses in Other Disciplines Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman General Principles

The world is composed of networks - not densely-knit, tightly-bounded groups Structured social relationships are a more powerful source of social explanation than personal attributes Norms emerge from location in structured systems of social relationships Social structures affect the operation of dyadic relationships Networks provide flexible means of social organization and of thinking about social organization Networks have emergent properties of structure and composition Networks are a major source of social capital mobilizable in themselves and from their contents Networks are self-shaping and reflexive Networks scale up to networks of networks 17 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Working Assumptions

Ties are asymmetrically reciprocal, differing in content & intensity Ties link network members indirectly and directly. Hence, ties must be defined within the context of network structures The structuring of ties creates nonrandom networks. Hence, clusters, boundaries, cross-linkages Cross-linkages connect clusters as well as individuals Super-connectors account for many short-cuts Asymmetric ties & complex networks differentially distribute scarce resources 18 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

The Social Network Approach

Moving from a hierarchical society bound up in groups to a network – and network ing – society Multiple / work networks Multiplicity of specialized relations Management by networks More alienation, more maneuverability Loosely-coupled organizations / societies Less centralized The networked society

19 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Changing Connectivity: Groups to Networks

Densely Knit > Sparsely-Knit Impermeable (Bounded) > Permeable Broadly-Based Solidarity > Specialized Multiple Foci

20 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Ways of Looking at Networks

Whole Networks & Personal Networks Focus on the System or on the Set of Individuals Not Necessarily People: Web Nodes, Organizations Graphs & Matrices We dream in graphs We analyze in matrices Dualities of Persons and Groups (2-mode)

21 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Duality of Persons & Groups

People Link Groups Groups Link People An Interpersonal Net is an Interorganizational Net Ronald Breiger 1973

22 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

The Dualities of Persons and Groups -- Graphs

23 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Dualities of Persons and Groups -- Matrices

24 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Dualities of Persons and Groups: Event-Event Matrix

25 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Network Size Matters

(Robert) Metcalfe’s Law – (Xerox PARC, 1973) For every network member added The number of possible ties grows by N 2 10 people => 10 2 possible ties = 100 (David) Reed’s Law (MIT emeritus, 1997) For every network member added The number of possible (sub)groups grows by 2 N 10 people => 2 10 possible groups = 1,024 Not only does Reed give a higher number than Metcalf The disparity increases greatly as N increases However, many of these subgroups are very similar 26 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Whole Social Networks

Comprehensive Set of Role Relationships in an Entire Social System Analyze Each Role Relationship – Can Combine Composition: % Women; Heterogeneity; % Weak Ties Structure: Pattern of Ties Village, Organization, Kinship, Enclaves, World-System Copernican Airplane View Typical Methods: Cliques, Blocks, Centrality, Flows Examples: (1) What is the Real Structure of an Organization? (2) How Does Information Flow Through a Village? 27 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman The “““Fishbowl“FishbowlFishbowl””””Group Office: Door-to-Door

All Work Together in Same Room All Visible to Each Another All have Physical Access to Each Other All can see when a Person is Interruptible All can see when One Person is with Another No Real Secrets No Secret Meetings Anyone can Observe Conversations & Decide to Join Little Alert to Others Approaching

28 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Neighbors have Hi Visual & Aural Awareness Limited Number of Participants Densely-Knit (most directly connected) Tightly Bounded (most interactions within group) Frequent Contact Recurrent Interactions Long-Duration Ties Cooperate for Clear, Collective purposes Sense of Group Solidarity (name, collective identity) Social Control by Supervisor & Group

29 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman The “““Switchboard“SwitchboardSwitchboard””””Network Office: Person-to-Person

Each Works Separately Office Doors Closable for Privacy Glass in Doors Indicate Interruptibility If Doors Locked, Must Knock If Doors Open, Request Admission Difficult to learn if Person is Dealing with Others Unless Door is Open Large Number of Potential Interactors Average Person knows > 1,000 Strangers & Friends of Friends May also be Contacted 30 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Sparsely-Knit Most Don’t Know Each Other Or Not Aware of Mutual Contact No Detailed Knowledge of Indirect Ties Loosely-Bounded Many Different People Contacted Many Different Workplaces Can Link with Outside Organizations Each Functions Individually Collective Activities Transient, Shifting Sets Subgroups, Cleavages, Secrets Can Develop

31 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

EgoEgo----CenteredCentered (Personal) Nets

From Point of View of Individual World According to Garp What Kind of Information, Support, etc. Can I Get ICT vs. Transportation Tradeoffs Networked Household Networked Individualism Usually Large Samples Our Connected Lives Study

32 Bounded Groups Unit to Unit CSCW

Person-to-Person Networked Individualism Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Community On & Off? Line Ties narrow, specialized or broadly based? Supportive? What kinds? Reciprocated? Are these tie characteristics or emergent structural properties – avoid dyadic bias of HCI Sustain weak or strong? Online effects on “real-life” community? Bowling Alone - Putnam Effects on the diversity of community ties? Effects on cross-linkages? Solidary groups (like traditional villages) or thinly-connected webs?

34 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Varieties of Social Network Analysis

Organizational Analyses (Whole Network) With Glocalization Citation Analyses

35 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

65

Outside Organization

178

Elsewhere in Organization

285

Within Department

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

36 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Glocalization in a Organizational Network

65

Outside Organization

178

Elsewhere in Organization

285

Within Department

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Quan-Haase & Wellman, “Hyperconnected Net Work” (2005) 37 k f Quan-Haase & Wellman, “Hyperconnected Net Work” (in Adler & Heckscher, 2005) r M o e m m b N e e r t w t o o r k P a M r e t m i Client Services Managers and Supervisors b c Software Development Facilitators and Programmers e i r Figure 1. Information Network – Weekly Exchanges p Client Services Managers and Supervisors a t n Software Development Facilitators and Programmers o t P aR re Figure 2. Social Network –Annual Interactions tc i Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Cumulative GlobeNet Intercitation Through 2000

Howard White & Barry Wellman, 2003 “Does Citation Reflect Social Structure” 39 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Strongest Globenet CoCo----Citation,Citation, Intercitation Links Thru 2000

40 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Some Whole Network Methods

QAP Regression of Matrices • Example: Co-Citation (Intellectual Tie) Predicts Better than Friendship (Social Tie) To Inter-Citation Clustering: High Density; Tight Boundaries (“Groups”) Block Modeling Similar Role Relationships, Not Necessarily Clusters Canada & Mexico in Same Block – US Dominated

41 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Blockmodelling: From a Matrix > . . .

42 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman . . . To a Block Model

43 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Costs of Whole Network Analysis

Requires a Roster of Entire Population Requires (Imposition of) a Social Boundary This May Assume What You Want to Find Hard to Handle Missing Data Needs Special Analytic Packages

44 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Small World Networks

“A little randomness goes a long way” 1 Length of Small World Network path .5 between people

0 .5 1 Random connections

45 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman ScaleScale----FreeFree Networks

“The rich get richer” Why do so many networks have spokes & hubs? Barabasi and Albert: Growth + Preferential Attachment = Scale Free networks.

Random: Highway Scale Free: The Airways

46 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Personal Social Networks

Ptolemaic Ego-Centered View Good for Unbounded Networks Often Uses Survey Research Examples: Do Densely-Knit Networks Provide More Support? (structure) Do More Central People Get More Support? (network) Do Women Provide More Support? (composition) Do Face-to-Face Ties Provide More Support Than Internet Ties? (relational) Are People More Isolated Now? (ego) 47 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Connected Lives Study

Juan Carrasco Bernie Hogan Barry Wellman (this module) Plus Kristen Berg Jeff Boase Jennifer Kayahara Tracy Kennedy

48 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Goals

Create participant-aided sociogram. Maximize the size of the rich egocentric network. Making connectivity easier. Use sociogram as cognitive aid and prompt.

49 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Paper vs. Computer?

The initial program was written in Python with sociogram plug-in through Jung Slow turnaround Difficult to debug Interviews were depersonalized and potentially intimidating

50 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

We opted for paper

Allowed fast turnaround for changes. More engaging for participants. Computer use has been shifted to coding stage. “Use what works where it works best”

51 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

52 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

53 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

54 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

55 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

56 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

57 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

58 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

59 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

60 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

61 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

62 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

63 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

64 p NpBarryp Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman eoo tr r wt t o rf f kr r oo MmmTable 1: Terminology Used for Exchange Resources Partners Exchanged and e mNN e b eEXCHANGE PARTNERSRESOURCES EXCHANGED et t rww oo tr r Restricted (Similar) Generalized (Mixed) okk M PM One-to-One one-to-one restricted one-to-one generalized aee rmm tbb e i e Network network restricted network generalized cr r i pt t aoo n 65 P Table 4. Summary of Cumulative Logit Analysis for Variables Predicting Reciprocal Emotional Support of Network Members (n = 335) Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 bOdds b Odds b Odds b Odds s.e s.e s.e s.e Services by Participants Emotional Support 1.85 **** 6.38 1.70 **** 5.49 1.68 **** 5.38 1.58 **** 4.87 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 Minor Services 0.37 * 1.45 0.42 ** 1.53 0.55 ** 1.73 0.15 0.16 0.17 Major Services 0.17 1.19 0.04 1.05 -0.05 0.95 0.25 0.27 0.29 Relational Attributes Tie Strength (strong ties=1) 0.01 1.01 0.43 1.54 0.28 0.31 Frequency of Phone Contact 0.01 1.01 0.03 1.03 0.20 0.23 Frequency of Face to Face Contact -0.12 0.88 0.07 1.07 0.23 0.26 Network Member’s Role Relationship Parent/Adult Child 0.81 2.24 0.65 1.91 0.53 0.60 Sibling 0.37 1.45 0.74 2.10 0.38 0.41 Friend 0.33 1.39 0.61 1.83 0.37 0.39 Neighbor -0.31 0.74 -0.56 0.56 0.39 0.43 Social Characteristics of Network Members Sex (female=1) 0.86 ** 2.37 0.31 Marital Status (married=1) 0.36 1.44 0.29 Age 0.03 ** 1.03 0.01 Social Characteristics of Participants Sex (female=1) 0.22 1.24 0.34 Marital Status (married=1) -0.01 0.98 0.33 Age 0.09 **** 0.91 0.02 Size of Network Netsize 0.09 *** 1.01 0.03 -2 Log L 535.4 526.5 518.0 462.0 N 335 335 335 335 † p < .10. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001. *** * p < .0001. Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Advantages of Paper Technique:

Cost Intelligibilty Large (easy to see) Less technical burden on interviewee Emotional impact / Empowerment

67 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Disadvantages

Technical burden on interviewer Limited real-time sampling algorithms Large (unwieldy) Cost shifted to transcription? Limited network size Connectivity coding is difficult Slow (but probably no more than online)

68 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Costs of Personal Network Studies

Concentrates on Strong Ties Collecting Proper Data in Survey Takes Much Time Ignores Ecological Juxtapositions Hard to Aggregate from Personal Network to Whole Network Easier to Decompose Whole Network • (Haythornthwaite & Wellman) Often Relies on Respondents’ Reports

69 Multilevel Analysis: New Approach to an Old Problem

Switching and Combining Levels Individual Agency, Dyadic Dancing, Network Facilitation & Emergent Properties Consider Wider Range of Theories Disentangles (& Avoids Nagging Confounding) Tie Effects Network Effects Contingent (Cross-Level) Effects Interactions Addresses Emergent Properties Fundamental Sociological Issue Simmel vs. Homans Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Multilevel Analysis – Tie Effects

Tie Strength: Stronger is More Supportive Workmates: Provide More Everyday Support •(Multilevel Discovered This) •Bryk & Rautenbush’s book • Little Green Sage Publication book

71 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Multilevel AnalysisAnalysis––––Network Effects

Network Size •Not Only More Support from Entire Network •More Probability of Support from Each Network Member Mutual Ties ( Reciprocity): •Those Who Have More Ties with Network Members Provide More Support •Cross-Level Effect Stronger (and Attenuates) Dyadic (Tie-Level) Effect

It’s Contribution to the Network, Not the Alter 72 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Multilevel Analysis: CrossCross----Level,Level, Interaction Effects

Kinship No longer a solidary system Parent-(Adult) Child Interaction •More Support From Each When > 1 Parent-Child Tie •Single P-C Tie: 34% •2+ P-C Ties, Probability of Support from Each: 54%

73 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Multilevel InteractionsInteractions------Accessibility

37% of Moderately Accessible Ties Provide Everyday Support But If Overall Network Is Moderately Supportive, 54% of All Network Members Provide Everyday Support Women More Supportive In Nets with More Women 74 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Social Network Analysis: More Flavors

Diffusion of Information (& Viruses) Flows Through Systems Organizational Analyses “Real” Organization” Knowledge Acquisition & Management InterInter----OrganizationalOrganizational Analysis Is There a Ruling Elite Strategies, Deals Networking: How People Network As a Strategy Unconscious Behavior Are There Networking Personality Types? 75 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

SNA: Branching Out

Social Movements World-Systems Analyses Information Networks Cognitive Networks Web Networks Citation Networks: Co-Citation, Inter-Citation Applied Networks Terrorist Networks Corruption Networks Drug Trade

76 BarryLittle Wellman Boxes www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellmanRamified Networks **** Each in its Place Mobility of People and Goods **** United Family Serial Marriage, Mixed Custody Shared Community Multiple, Partial Personal Nets Neighborhoods Dispersed Networks Voluntary Organizations Informal Leisure Face-to-Face Computer-Mediated Communication Public Spaces Private Spaces Focused Work Unit Networked Organizations Job in a Company Career in a Profession Autarky Outsourcing Office, Factory Airplane, Internet, Cellphone Ascription Achievement Hierarchies Matrix Management Conglomerates Virtual Organizations/Alliances Cold War Blocs Fluid, Transitory Alliances 77 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman The Internet in Everyday Life

Computer Networks as Social Networks Key Questions Community On and Off line Networked Life before the Internet Netville: The Wired Suburb Large Web Surveys: National Geographic Work On and Off line Towards Networked Individualism, ororor The Retreat to Little Boxes

78 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Guiding Research Principles

Substitute systematic data analysis for hype Do field studies, not lab experiments Combine statistical with observational info. Study the use of each media in larger context Work with other disciplines Analyze Existing Uses Develop New Uses

79 Research Questions

1.1.1. Ties: Does the Internet support all types of ties ? 1. Weak and Strong? 2. Instrumental and Socio-Emotional? 3. Online-Only or Using Internet & Other Media (F2F, Phone)? 2.2.2. Social Capital: Has the Internet increased, decreased, or multiplied contact – at work, in society? 1. Interpersonally – Locally 2. Interpersonally – Long Distance 3. Organizationally 3.3.3. GloCalizationGloCalization:::: Has the map of the world dissolved so much that distance does not matter? Has the Internet brought spatial and social peripheries closer to the center? Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Research Questions (cont’d)

4.4.4. Structure: Does the Internet facilitate working in loosely-coupled networks rather than dense, tight groups ? 5.5.5. Knowledge Management: How do people find and acquire usable knowledge in networked and virtual organizations

81 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Studies of Community On and OffOff----LineLine

Pre-Internet Networked Communities “Netville”: The Wired Suburb National Geographic Web Survey 1998, 2001 Other Internet Community Studies Barry Wellman, “The Network Community” Introduction to Networks in the Global Village Westview Press, 1999

82 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Door To Door

Old Workgroups/ Communities Based on Propinquity, Kinship Pre-Industrial Villages, Wandering Bands All Observe and Interact with All Deal with Only One Group Knowledge Comes Only From Within the Group – and Stays Within the Group

83 Place To Place (Phones, Networked PCs, Airplanes, Expressways, RR, Transit) Home, Office Important Contexts, Not Intervening Space Ramified & Sparsely Knit: Not Local Solidarities Not neighborhood-based Not densely-knit with a group feeling Partial Membership in Multiple Workgroups/ Communities Often Based on Shared Interest Connectivity Beyond Neighborhood, Work Site Household to Household / Work Group to Work Group Domestication, Feminization of Community Deal with Multiple Groups Knowledge Comes From Internal & External Sources “Glocalization”: Globally Connected, Locally Invested Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Person To Person (Cell Phones, Wireless Computing)

Little Awareness of Context Individual, Not Household or Work Group Personalized Networking Tailored Media Interactions Private Desires Replace Public Civility Less Caring for Strangers, Fewer Weak Ties Online Interactions Linked with Offline Dissolution of the Internal: All Knowledge is External

85 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

“Netville”: The Wired Suburb

Leading-Edge Development Exurban Toronto Mid-Priced, Detached Tract Homes Bell Canada, etc. Field Trial 10Mb/sec, ATM-Based, No-Cost Internet Services Ethnographic Fieldwork Hampton Lived There for 2 Years Survey Research Wants, Networks, Activities

86 The entrance to Netville Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

View of Netville

88 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

“““Wired“WiredWired””””and “““Non“NonNon----WiredWiredWired””””Neighboring in Netville

Mean Number of Non- Wired/ Signif. Wired Neighbors : Wired NonWired Level (37) (20 ) Ratio (p <)

Recognized by Name 25.5 8.4 3.0 .00

Talk with Regularly 6.3 3.1 2.0 .06

Invited into 3.9 2.7 1.4 .14 Own Home

Invited into 3.9 2.5 1.6 .14 Neighbors’ Homes

# of Intervening Lots 7.5 5.6 1.4 .08 to Known Neighbors

89 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Neighboring Ties

Wired Residents Recognize More Talk with More Invite More Into their Homes And are Invited by Them Neighbor in a Wider Area

90 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

LongLong----DistanceDistance Ties (>50 km/30 mi )

Compared to one year before moving to Netville, Wired Residents Have MoreMore ThanThan NonNon --Wired:Wired: Social Contact – especially over 500 km Help Given (e.g., childcare, home repair) Help Received from Friends and Relatives Especially between 50 and 500 km

91 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

LongLong----DistanceDistance Ties

Wired Residents Say the Internet:

Makes it Easier to Communicate Fosters Greater Volume of Communication Introduces New Modes of Communication Acquire More Diverse Knowledge

92 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman “““Netville“NetvilleNetville””””:: The Wired Suburb

With Keith Hampton (MIT) “Netville Online and Offline: Observing and Surveying a Wired Suburb.” American Behavioral Scientist 43, 3 (Nov 1999): 475-92.

“Examining Community in the Digital Neighborhood” Pp. 475-92 in Digital Cities: Technologies, Experiences and Future Perspectives , edited by Toru Ishida and Katherine Isbister. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2000.

“Long Distance Community in the Network Society” American Behavioral Scientist , 45 (Nov 2001): 477-97

“How the Internet Builds Local Community”. City and Community, 2001 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman National Geographic Survey 2000 and Survey 2001

“Survey 2000” -- Fall 1998 35,000 Americans 5,000 Canadians 15,000 “Others” “Survey 2001” -- Fall 2001, N > 6,000

94 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Survey 2000 Research Questions

Are There Systematic Social Variations in Who Uses the Internet – for What? Does the Internet Multiply, Add To, or Decrease Interpersonal Ties ? Does the Internet Multiply, Add To, or Decrease Organizational Involvement ? Does the Internet Increase, Decrease or Transform Community Commitment? Does the Internet Increase Knowledge? Are There Variations by National Context?

95 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Figure 2a: Frequency of Contact with Near-by Kin (D ays/Year) 250 228 208 201 209 200 191 193

150 118 117 113 116 116 100 84 67 65 64 63 58114 50 23 49 6 6 6 13 0 1 6 6 7 7 Never Rarely Monthly Weekly Few times/wk Daily 5 Use Total Phone F2F Email Letters

Percentage of Different Media Used for Contact with Near-By Kin Email Letters 17% 3%

Phone F2F 53% 27%

96 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Computer Supported Cooperative Work

Fishbowls and Switchboards Media Use and Choice Cerise Indigo Networked Scholarly Organizations Technet Globenet Teleworking: The Home-Work Nexus

97 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

CSCW Research Questions

How do Work, Social Roles Affect Media Use? Is Email Used Only for Specialized Communication? Does Email Use: Replace, Add To, or Increase F2F, Phone Contact? Does Email Move Spatial/Social Peripheries Socially Closer? Does Email Foster Networked Organization?

98 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Separate Information Exchange Roles Derived from Factor Analysis of Specific Exchanges

Work Giving Work Receiving Work Collaborative Writing Computer Programming Social Sociability Major Emotional Support

99 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Communication Roles

Scheduled Meetings Classes, Research Meetings Email Unscheduled Meetings Less Frequent, More Wide-Ranging Media that Afford Control of Interactions Media associated with Group Norms

100 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Social Roles

Sociability, major emotional support Media Use follows Pairs’ Interaction Patterns Unscheduled Meetings for Close Friends Unscheduled, Scheduled, Email for Work-Only Media that Affords Spontaneity Social Messages Tag on Work Messages Work-Only Pairs; Formal Work-Role Pairs

101 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

The Average Pair:

Specialized ::: Exchanges 3/6 Types of Information Via 1 or 2 Media Unscheduled F2F, Scheduled F2F Meetings, or Email Mean = 5.2 Information-Media Links / Pair

102 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Conclusions: The Cerise Study

Away from Individual Choice, Congruency Social Affordances Only Create Possibilities Email Used for All Roles: Work, Knowledge, Sociability and Support Email Lowers Status Distances Email Network Not a Unique Social Network Intermixed with Face-to-Face (low use of phone, video, fax) Reduces Temporal as well as Spatial Distances

103 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

The More Email, the More F2F Contact The More Intense Work & Friendship Tie The More Frequent Email Independent Predictors: Friendship a bit Stronger The More Intense Work & Friendship Tie The More Types of Media Used to Communicate Independent Predictors: Friendship Stronger F2F the Medium of choice in weaker ties. In Stronger Ties, Email Supplements F2F

104 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Indigo: Work Interaction Time 1

Work Interaction (All Media) Prior to Telepresence

105 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Indigo: Work Interaction Time 3

Work Interaction (All Media) 14 months after Telepresence Intro Greater Decentralization 106 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman “““Cerise“CeriseCerise””””/ “““Indigo“IndigoIndigo””””Papers

Caroline Haythornthwaite and Barry Wellman, “Work, Friendship and Media Use for Information Exchange in a Networked Organization.”Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 (1998): 1101-14 Marilyn Mantei, Ronald Baecker, William Buxton, Thomas Milligan, Abigail Sellen and Barry Wellman. "Experiences in the Use of a Media Space." 1992. Pp 372-78 in Groupware, edited by David Marca and Geoffrey Bock. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 1992. Caroline Haythornthwaite, Barry Wellman & Marilyn Mantei “Work Relationships and Media Use.” Group Decision and Negotiation 4 (1995): 193-211. Caroline Haythornthwaite, Barry Wellman & Laura Garton, “Work and Community Via Computer-Mediated Communication.” Pp. 199-226 in Psychology and the Internet, edited by Jayne Gackenbach. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998.

107 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Netting Scholars: Communities of Practice & Inquiry

Emmanuel Koku, Nancy Nazer & Barry Wellman “Netting Scholars: Online and Offline.” American Behavioral Scientist , 44 ,10 (June, 2001): 1750-72

Emmanuel Koku & Barry Wellman “Scholarly Networks as Learning Communities” In Designing Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning,

Ed ited by Sasha Barab & Rob Kling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002

108 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Comparison of 2 Scholarly Networks Globenet Technet Year Founded Founded in 1991-93 Founded in 1995-96 Size 16 (13 men, 3 women) 32 (22 men, 9 women) Membership Invitational: merit, Voluntary interdisciplinary, niche Location Canada, US, UK 1 Ontario university Activities 3 Meetings /year Frequent seminars, Production of a book conferences Joint courses, retreats Funding 9 Senior Fellows get full Members not funded by salaries Technet 7 Associate Fellows get Many receive other partial funding research grants 109 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Globenet members use both F2F & email to get their joint projects done. The dispersion of members across Canada, U.S. & U.K. leads them to use email as a collaborative tool.

110 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

. For Globenetters, the distance between members of scholarly pairs is unrelated to the frequency of their email contact. Except when they’re in the same building

111 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Friendship is the strongest predictor to face-to-face & email contact in Technet & Globenet

112 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

The scholarly relationship of collaborating on a project is the second strongest predictor of frequent F2F contact & frequent email contact. It & friendship are the only 2 significant predictors.

113 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Congruent with the theories of media use: Tasks requiring complex negotiations preferably conducted via richer F2F contacts. Technet members use F2F contact when possible. Email fills in temporal & informational gaps. Those Technet members who often read each other’s work, communicate more by email.

114 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Where F2F contact is easily done, it is the preferred medium for collaborative work. However, colleagues easily share their ideas and their work – or announce its existence – by email and web postings. They do not have to walk over to each other’s offices to do this, although Canadian winters can inhibit in-person visits

115 Summary: ComputerComputer----MediatedMediated Communication

Not only supports online “virtual” communities Supports and maintains existing ties: strong & weak Increases connectivity with weak ties Supports both local and non-local social ties In Neighborhood, High-speed Network: Increases local network size Increases amount of local contact Long-Distance, High-Speed Network Increases amount of contact Increases support exchanged Facilitates contact with geographical periphery Summary: The GloCalization Paradox

Surf and Email Globally Stay Wired at Office/Home to be Online Desire for Local/Distant Services and Information Internet Supplements/Augments F2F Doesn’t Replace It; Rarely Used Exclusively Media Choice? By Any Means Available Many are Local – Within the Workgroup or Community Local Becomes Just Another Interest Evidence: Netville, National Geographic, Small Cities, Berkeley, Netting Scholars, Cerise, Indigo, Telework Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Conclusions: How a Network Society Looks

Multiplicity of Specialized Relations Management by Networks More Uncertainty, More Maneuverability Boutiques, not General Stores Less Palpable than Traditional Solidarities Need Navigation Tools

An Electronic Group is Virtually a Social Network." Pp. 179- 205 in Culture of the Internet, edited by Sara Kiesler. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997.

118 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Conclusions: Shift to New Kinds Of Community & Workgroups

Partial Membership in Multiple Networks Multiple Reports Long-Distance Relationships Transitory Work Relationships Each Person Operates Own Network Online Interactions Linked with Offline Status, Power, Social Characteristics Important Sparsely-Knit: Fewer Direct Connections Than Door-To-Door -- Need for Institutional Memory & Knowledge Management IKNOW (Nosh Contractor) – Network Tracer ContactMap (Bonnie Nardi & Steve Whittaker) – Network Accumulator

119 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Conclusions: The Rise of Personalized Networking

Individual Agency Constrained by Nets: Personalization rather than Group Behavior Interpersonal Ties Dancing Dyadic Duets: Bandwidth Sparsely-Knit, Physically-Dispersed Ties Social Networks Multiple, Ad Hoc Wireless Portability

120 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Design Considerations for a Networked Society –––Autonomy

Incorporate Third Parties Quickly Set Up & Dissolve Work Teams Privacy Protection Control Who is Aware of the Interaction Alert if Others Lurking File Access Cross-Platform Communication

121 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Three Modes of Interaction

Social Structure

Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Metaphor Fishbowl Core-Periphery Switchboard

Unit of Analysis Village, Band, Shop, Office Household, Work, Unit, Networked Individual Multiple Networks

Social Organization Groups Home Bases Networked Individualism Network of Networks

EraEraEra Traditional Contemporary Emerging

122 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Boundaries

Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Physical Context Dominance of immediate context Relevance of immediate context Ignorance of immediate context

Modality Door-to-Door Place-to-Place Person-to-Person

Predominant Mode of Face-to-Face Wired phone , Communication Internet Wireless modem

Spatial Range Local GloCal = Local + Global Global

Locale All in common household and work Common household and work spaces External spaces for core + external periphery

Awareness and Availability All visible and audible to all Core immediately visible, audible; Little awareness of availability High awareness of availability Little awareness of others’ availability - Must be contacted - must be contacted Visibility and audibility must be negotiated

Access Control Doors wide open to in-group members Doors ajar within and between Doors closed Walled off from others networks Access to others by request External gate guarded Look, knock and ask Knock and ask

Physical Access All have immediate access to all Core have immediate access Contact requires a journey or Contacting others requires a journey or telecommunications telecommunications

Permeability Impermeable wall around unit Household and workgroup have strong Individual has strong to weak connections to weak outside connections

123 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Boundaries (continued)

Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Interruptibility High: (Open Door) Mixed : Core interruptible Low : Contact must be requested Norm of Interruption Others require deliberate requests May be avoided or refused Answering machine Prioritizing voice mail Knocking on door that may be ajar or Internet filter closed Knocking on door that may be ajar or Norm of Interruption within immediate closed network only Norm of interruption within immediate network only Observability High : All can see when other group Mixed : Core can observe core Low : Interactions with other network members are interacting Periphery cannot observe core or members rarely visible interactions with other network members

Privacy Low information control: Low information control: High information control: Few secrets Few secrets for core Many secrets Status/Position becomes important Variable information control for Information and ties become important capital periphery capital Material resources and network connections become important capital

Joining In Anyone can observe interactions Interactions outside the core rarely Interactions rarely observable Anyone can join observable Difficult to join Difficult to join Alerts Little awareness of others approaching High prior awareness of periphery’s High prior awareness of others’ desire to Open, unlocked doors desire to interact interact Telephone ring, doorbell Formal requests

124 Interpersonal Interactions

Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Predominant Basis of Ascription (What you are born into) “Protect Your Base Before You Attack” Free agent Interaction e.g., Gender, ethnicity (attributed to Mao)

Frequency of Contact High within group Moderate within core; Variable, low with most; Low to moderate outside of core Moderate overall

Recurrency Recurrent interactions within group Recurrent interactions within core; Low with most others; Intermittent with each network Moderate overall member Duration Long duration ties: Long duration for household core Short duration ties cradle-to-grave; employed for life (except for divorce); Short duration otherwise

Domesticity Cradle-to-grave Long-term partners Changing partners; Living together; Singles; Mom and Dad Serial monogamy Single parents; Dick and Jane Dick lives with divorced parent Nanny cares for Jane

Scheduling Drop-In anytime Drop-in within household, work core; Scheduled appointments Appointments otherwise

Transaction Speed Slow Variable in core; Fast in periphery Fast

Autonomy & Proactivity Low autonomy Mixed : Autonomy within household & High autonomy High reactivity work cores High proactivity High proactivity & autonomy with others Tie Maintenance Group maintains ties Core groups maintain internal ties; Ties must be actively maintained, one-by- Other ties must be actively maintained one

Predictability Predictability, certainty and security Moderate predictability, certainty and Unpredictability, uncertainty, insecurity, within group interactions security within core; contingency, opportunity Interactions with others less predictable, certain and secure

Latency Leaving is betrayal; Ability to reestablish relationships Ability to reestablish relationships quickly Re-Entry difficult quickly with network members not with network members not seen in years seen in years Social Networks Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Number of Social Circles Few : Household, kin, work Multiple : Core household, work unit; Multiple : Dyadic or network ties with Multiple sets of friends, kin, work household, work unit, friends, kin, work associates, neighbors associates, neighbors

Maneuverability Little choice of social circles Choice of core and Choice of social circles other social circles

Trust Building Enforced by group Core enforces trust Dependent on cumulative reciprocal Betrayal of one is betrayal of all Networked members depend on exchanges and ties with mutual others cumulative reciprocal exchanges and ties with mutual others Social Support Broad (“multistranded”) Broad household and work core; Specialized Specialized kin, friends, other work

Social Integration By groups only Cross-cutting ties between networks Cross-cutting ties between networks integrate society; integrate society Core is the common hub Cooperation Group cooperation Core cooperation; Independent schedules Joint activity for clear, collective Otherwise: short-term alliances, Transient alliances with shifting sets of purposes tentatively reinforced by trust building others and ties with mutual others Knowledge All aware of most information Core Knows Most Things Variable awareness of and access to what Information open to all within unit Variable awareness of and access to periphery knows Secret to outsiders what periphery knows

Social Control Superiors and group exercise Moderate control by core household Subgroups, cleavages tight control and workgroup, with some spillover to Partial, fragmented control within interactions with periphery specialized networks Fragmented control within specialized Adherence to norms must be internalized networks by individuals Adherence to norms must be internalized by individuals Resources Conserves resources Acquires resources for core units Acquires resources for self

Basis of Success Getting along Getting along Networking Position within group Position within core; Networking Filling structural holes between networks Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Norms and Perceptions

Phenomena Little Boxes Glocalization Networked Individualism

Socialization Obey group elders Obey your parents; cherish your Develop strategies and tactics spouse; nurture your children; for self-advancement Defer to your boss; work and play well with colleagues and friends

Sense of Solidarity High group solidarity Moderate solidarity within core Sense of being an autonomous individual Collective identity household and workgroup, Fuzzy identifiable networks Collective name Vitiated by many ties to multiple peripheries

Loyalty Particularistic : Public and private spheres: Self High group loyalty Moderate loyalty to home base Global weak and divided loyalties takes precedence over weak loyalty elsewhere

Conflict Handling Revolt, coup Back-biting Avoidance Irrevocable departure Keeping distance Exit Commitment to High within groups High within core; Variable Network Members Variable elsewhere

Zeitgeist Communitarian Conflicted Existential

127 Little Boxes  Ramified Networks **** Each in its Place  Mobility of People and Goods **** United Family  Serial Marriage, Mixed Custody Shared Community  Multiple, Partial Personal Nets Neighborhoods  Dispersed Networks Voluntary Organizations  Informal Leisure Face-to-Face  Computer-Mediated Communication Public Spaces  Private Spaces Focused Work Unit  Networked Organizations Job in a Company  Career in a Profession Autarky  Outsourcing Office, Factory  Airplane, Internet, Cellphone Ascription  Achievement Hierarchies  Matrix Management Conglomerates  Virtual Organizations/Alliances Cold War Blocs  Fluid, Transitory Alliances Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Edited Books

The Internet in Everyday Life Caroline Haythornthwaite, co-editor Oxford: Blackwell Publishers 2002 Preliminary: American Behavioral Scientist, Nov 2001

Networks in the Global Village Boulder, CO: Westview Press 1999

Social Structures: A Network Approach S. D. Berkowitz, co-editor Cambridge University Press, 1988; Reprinted: Elsevier-JAI Press, 1997 Reprinted: CSPI Press, Toronto, 2003 129 Barry Wellman www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman

Recent Integrative Articles

“Computer Networks as Social Networks” Science 293 (Sept 14, 2001): 2031-34. “Designing the Internet for a Networked Society.” Communications of the ACM, April 2002: in press.

Research Supported By: Institute of Knowledge Management ,,, CITO, Microsoft Research, Mitel, National Science Foundation (US), Social Science & Humanities Research Council of Canada

130 Thank You -- Barry Wellman

Director, NetLab Centre for Urban & Community Studies Toronto, Canada M5S 1A1 [email protected] www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman