Models and Marginals: Using Survey Evidence to Study Social Networks
- 1 August 2009
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in American Sociological Review
- Vol. 74 (4) , 670-681
- https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400409
Abstract
Fischer (2009) argues that our estimates of confidant network size in the 2004 General Social Survey (GSS), and therefore the trend in confidant network size from 1985 to 2004, are implausible because they are (1) inconsistent with other data and (2) contain internal anomalies that call the data into question. In this note, we assess the evidence for a decrease in confidant network size from 1985 to 2004 in the GSS data. We conclude that any plausible modeling of the data shows a decided trend downward in confidant network size from 1985 to 2004. The features that Fischer calls anomalies are exactly the characteristics described by our models (Table 5) in the original article.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- The 2004 GSS Finding of Shrunken Social Networks: An Artifact?American Sociological Review, 2009
- Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two DecadesAmerican Sociological Review, 2008
- The Ties that Bind are FrayingContexts, 2008
- Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two DecadesAmerican Sociological Review, 2006
- Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social NetworksAnnual Review of Sociology, 2001
- Bowling alonePublished by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) ,2000
- Interpretation and interview context: examining the General Social Survey name generator using cognitive methodsSocial Networks, 1999
- Social Networks and Organizational DynamicsAmerican Sociological Review, 1992
- A Dynamic Model of Voluntary AffiliationSocial Forces, 1981
- Size and the Density of Interaction in Human AggregatesAmerican Journal of Sociology, 1976