Last updated October 11, 2005. Links not guaranteed to work.
Caroline Haythornthwaite, GSLIS, UIUC
Tuesday, 9-12am, Fall 2005
First class August 30, 2005
Updated Schedule
|
Date |
Reading and Discussion topic |
|
August 30 |
1. Information and Networks |
|
Sept. 6 |
2. Introduction to SNA approach I: The social network perspective |
|
Sept. 13 |
3. Introduction to SNA approach II: Theoretical foundations |
|
Sept. 20 |
4. Ties and Relations: Information access through strong and weak ties
Glossary Terms Actors, actor attributes, relations, ties (strong, weak), dyads, triads, social networks (personal, ego-centric, and whole) |
|
Sept. 27 |
5. Social mobility and access to resources
Glossary Terms Roles (e.g., brokers, gurus) and positions (stars, cutpoints), structural holes, density, centrality and centralization, cliques
|
|
Oct. 4 |
6. Homophily & Social Support online
Glossary Terms Homophily, heterophily; multiplexity
|
|
Oct. 11 |
7. Social Capital
Glossary Terms Reciprocity, structural equivalence
Class will start with discussion of Homophily and Social Support, and answers to online questions. Then turn to Social capital. The section on Network Statistics will be deferred for a later class.
Read at least the text and a paper by Nan Lin, then add Putnam, Kavanaugh & Patterson, then Burt readings
D&F, Chpt 5: Social capital
Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections. http://www.insna.org/Connections-Web/Volume22-1/V22(1)-28-51.pdf [OR THE PREVIOUSLY LISTED ONES Lin, N. (2004, forthcoming). Social capital. Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology. OR Lin, N. (2005, forthcoming). A network theory of social capital. In Castigline, van Deth, & Wolleb, Handbook of Social Capital. Oxford Univ. Press.]
Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s
declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78. Kavanaugh A.L., & Patterson S.J.
(2001).The impact of community computer networks on social capital and
community involvement. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 496-509. |
|
Oct. 18 |
8. Social Conditions Glossary Terms Network size, reach, reachability
Starting with reading discussion, then moving on to lecture and discussion of how to conduct network studies
Hersberger, J. (2004). A qualitative approach to examining information transfer via social networks among homeless populations. Paper presented at the ASIST conference. Online at http://leep.lis.uiuc.edu/fall05/lis590sn/Herschberger_homeless.doc
Uehara, E. (1990). Dual exchange theory, social networks, and informal social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 521-557. Online via UIUC gateway
van Tilburg, T. (1998). Losing and gaining in old age: changes in personal network size and social support in a four-year longitudinal study. Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences, 53B(6), S313-S323. Online via UIUC gateway = Conducting network studies: questions and questionnaires
D&F, How many classweb do you know? pp. 16-21
|
|
Oct. 25 |
9. Online Social Networks and Community
Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213-238. Online via UIUC Gateway
Wellman, B., Boase, J. & Chen, W. (2002). The networked nature of community: Online and offline. IT & Society, 1(1), 151-165. http://www.stanford.edu/group/siqss/itandsociety/v01i01/v01i01a10.pdf
Haythornthwaite, C. (forthcoming). Social networks and online community. http://leep.lis.uiuc.edu/fall05/lis590sn/Hay_SocialNetsOnlineCommunity.doc
Haythornthwaite, C. & Wellman, B. (1998).Work, friendship and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1101-1114. Online via UIUC Gateway
|
|
Nov. 1 |
10. Technology and the Evolution of Networks GLOSSARY DUE
Burkhardt, M.E. & Brass, D.J. (1990). Changing patterns and patterns of change - The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. ASQ, 35(1), 104-127. Online via UIUC gateway http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-8392%28199003%2935%3A1%3C104%3ACPOPOC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S
Barley, Stephen R. (1990). The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (March), 61-103. Online via UIUC gateway http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0001-8392%28199003%2935%3A1%3C61%3ATAOTAS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I
Haythornthwaite, C. (2001). Exploring multiplexity: Social network structures in a computer-supported distance learning class. The Information Society, 17(3), 211-226. Online via UIUC gateway
Carley, K.M. (1999). On the evolution of social and organizational networks. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 3-30. http://www.casos.cs.cmu.edu/events/summer_institute/2001/reading_list/pdf/EvolutionofNetworks.pdf
|
|
Nov. 8 |
11. Diffusion, Influence and Contagion
D&F, chpt 7: Dynamics [text]
Gladwell, M. (1999) The Science of the Sleeper: How the Information Age could blow away the blockbuster. The New Yorker, October 4, 1999. http://www.gladwell.com/1999/1999_10_04_a_sleeper.htm
Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation.
Free Press. Chapter 8.
Monge & Contractor, chpt 6, Contagion, semantic and cognitive theories [text]
|
|
Nov. 15 |
12. Knowledge Sharing
Borgatti, S. & Cross, R. (2003). A social network view of organizational learning: Relational and structural dimensions of ‘know who.’ Management Science, 49, 432-445.
Cross, R., Parker, A., Prusak, L. & Borgatti, S.P. (2001). Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 100-120.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82-111.
Borgatti, S.P. & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.
|
|
Nov. 22 |
13. Thanksgiving |
|
Nov. 29 |
14. Collaboration and Innovation
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. ASQ, 45(3), 425-455.Online via UIUC Gateway
Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Building social networks via computer networks: Creating and sustaining distributed learning communities. In K.A. Renninger & W. Shumar, Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace (pp.159-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cross, R., Borgatti, S. & Parker, A. (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), 25-46. [see also The Hidden Power of Social Networks] Online via UIUC Gateway
Teigland, R. (2000). Communities of practice at an Internet firm: Netovation vs. on-time performance. In E.L. Lesser, M.A. Fontaine & J.A. Slusher (Eds.). Knowledge and Communities (pp.151-178). Boston, MA: Butterworth Heinemann. [I need to make a copy available]
|
|
Dec. 6 |
15. Student presentations |
LIS 590 SN is a graduate seminar in Social Networks and Information offered by the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The course is a non-mathematical introduction to the social network perspective and its potential for exploring social phenomena, with an emphasis on information processes. The social network approach considers the interactions that occur between classweb as the building blocks that determine social behavior. It is not an individual's behavior, but rather their behavior with others that is the important unit of analysis. Thus, to understand how classweb gain access to and distribute information, it is necessary to examine the types of interactions they engage in with others. The interactions show us patterns, and the patterns reveal how social groups organize themselves to accomplish certain goals. Such patterns reveal information effects in the way information circulates among members of a social group, its impact in disseminating knowledge, providing social support, and creating community. This course will examine structural aspects of information exchange in networks and their social effects, and what kinds of exchanges need to be supported to create social outcomes such as trust and community.
· social network approaches, principles, and basic techniques
· the meaning of relations, ties and networks
· the importance and role of strong and weak ties in information exchange
· network effects on information access, control and flow
· network effects in the diffusion and adoption of innovations
· formal and informal information exchange
· impact on social networks of changes in technology
· social networks and the web
While the course will focus on issues relating to information (broadly defined), all students will gain familiarity with basic concepts of social network analysis and those from other areas of inquiry will gain an understanding of the social network perspective that can be applied to problems in their own area.
Degenne, A. & Forsé, M. (1999). Introducing Social Networks. London: Sage.
Monge, Peter R. & Contractor, Noshir S. (2003). Theories of Communication Networks. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Other readings for each week are organized by topic and are drawn from various sources. Many of these will be available via the UIUC gateway or online in other forms.
INSNA – the International Network for Social Network Analysis – is the major professional organization for social network researchers. Each year this group sponsors the International Sunbelt Social Network Conference, usually held somewhere warm during the month of February. Explore the INSNA site for information on journals and social network analysis software. Those with interest in conducting a social network project should obtain one of the software packages, e.g., UCINET.
Reading and participating in class in an essential part of this seminar. Students are required to come to class prepared to discuss each weeks readings.
By mid-semester each class member will have built their own glossary of social network terms. Terms will be set each week based on the week's readings. Definitions will be brought to class each week and examined and refined in class. Your definitions should be refined to reflect their application to your own interests. Full glossary of terms is due
This short assignment (5 pages; 1000 words) describes how you could apply a social network approach to a problem of your own choosing. The assignment should give a description of the problem and how a social network approach could be used to illuminate some aspect of the problem, provide a set of social network questions you might ask to elicit the information you need for this problem, and suggest types of social network constructs that might be explored to examine this data and this problem.
Again, pursuing an area of your own interest, review the social network literature pertaining to the problem. This can be an extended version of the short assignment or it can concentrate on reviewing the literature on another topic. You may also carry out a network study as part or all of this assignment.
In the last weeks of class students will give an 15 minute in-class presentation on how to apply social network analysis to their own interests (e.g., a presentation based on the short assignment) or on the area they are reviewing (e.g., based on the literature review).
In general, each week we will explore some social network principles and readings on a particular topic. These are tied together as much as possible. Students will take turns being responsible for summarizing readings. In the early weeks, part of each class will include a lecture portion exploring social network analytic techniques, with rest of the class used for discussing readings. Discussion time will be greater as the semester progresses.
READINGS X WEEK [Original long list]
Depending on what texts you have, you can read the Degenne & Forse chapters and/or the Wasserman & Faust chapters. The latter is a more statistically intensive read, but is the major reference for social network analysis.
· Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research, 18, 323-342.
· D&F, Introduction: The paradigm of structural analysis
· Wellman, B. (1997). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. Social Structures: A Network Approach (updated edition) (pp. 19-61). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
· Monge, P. & Contractor, N. S. (1997). Emergence of Communication Networks. In F.M. Jablin & L.L. Putnam (Eds.) Handbook of Organizational Communication (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http:/www.tec.spcomm.uiuc.edu/nosh/HOCNets.html
· Watts, D.J. (2004). The “new” science of network. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 243-270.
· D&F, Chpt 1, Social relationships and networks
· W&F, Chapter 1, Social network analysis in the social and behavioral sciences, pp. 1-22; and Chapter 2, Social Network Data, pp.28-59
· Monge & Contractor, chpt 1, Networks and flows in organizational communication, pp. 3-25.
· Kilduff & Tsai, chpt 3 Is there social network theory? A critical examination of theoretical foundations, p. 66-86.
· D&F, Chpt 2: Personal networks and circles
· Wellman, B., Carrington, P. & Hall, A. (1997). Networks as personal communities. In B. Wellman & S.D. Berkowitz (Eds.), Social Structures: A Network Approach (pp. 130-84). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
· Monge & Contractor, p. 29-45
· Kilduff, M. & Tasi, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London: Sage. chpt 2 Understanding social network research, p. 13-34.
· Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
· Granovetter, M.S. (1982). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In P.V. Marsden & N. Lin (Eds.), Social Structure and Network Analysis (pp. 105-130). Beverly Hills: Sage.
· Krackhardt, D. (1999). The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations. 16, 183-210. OR Krackhardt, C. (1998). Simmelian ties: Super strong and sticky. In R. Kramer and M. Neale (eds.), Power and influence in organizations, pp. 21-38. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
· Levin, D. & Cross, R. (in press, 2004) The strength of weak ties you can trust. Management Science.
· Labianca, B., Brass, D.J., & Gray, B.L. (1998). Social networks and perceptions of intergroup conflict: The role of negative relationships and third parties. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 55-67.
· Labianca, B. & Brass, D.J. (2004, in press). Exploring the social ledger: Negative relationships and negative asymmetries in social networks in organizations. Academy of Management Review.
· D&F, Chpt 3, Graph Theory, p. 63-77.
· W&F, Chpt 4, Graphs and Matrices, p 92-121
· Podolny, Joel M. & Baron, James N. (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. Amercian Sociological Review, 62, 673-693.
· Lin, N. (1999). Social networks and status attainment. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 467-487. Available online at http://soc.AnnualReviews.org/cgi/content/full/25/1/467
· Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology Today, 1: 62-7.
· D&F, Chpt 4, Equivalence and Cohesion
· W&F, Chpt 9, Structural Equivalence
· (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks, Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
· Haines, Valerie A, Hurlbert, Jeanne, S., & Beggs, John J. (1996) Exploring the determinants of support provision: Provider characteristics, personal networks, community contexts, and support following life events. Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 37(3), 252-264.
· Wellman, B. & Gulia, M. (1999b). The network basis of social support: A network is more than the sum of its ties. In B. Wellman (Ed.). Networks in the Global Village (pp. 83-118). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
· Pugliesi, Karen. Shook, Scott L. (1998) Gender, ethnicity, and network characteristics: Variation in social support resources. Sex Roles, 38(3-4), 215-38.
· Monge & Contractor, chpt 8. Homophily, proximity and social support, pp. 223-239.
· D&F, Chpt 6, Power and Centrality
· W&F, Chpt 5, Centrality and Prestige
· D&F, Chpt 5: Social capital
· Lin, N. (2004, forthcoming). Social capital. Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology. OR Lin, N. (2005, forthcoming). A network theory of social capital. In Castigline, van Deth, & Wolleb, Handbook of Social Capital. Oxford Univ. Press.
· Burt, R.S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 345-423.
· Kavanaugh A.L., & Patterson S.J. (2001).The impact of community computer networks on social capital and community involvement. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 496-509. OR Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
· Hersberger, J. (2004). A qualitative approach to examining information transfer via social networks among homeless populations. Paper presented at the ASIST conference.
· Uehara, E. (1990). Dual exchange theory, social networks, and informal social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 521-557.
· van Tilburg, T. (1998). Losing and gaining in old age: changes in personal network size and social support in a four-year longitudinal study. Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences, 53B(6), S313-S323.
· D&F, How many classweb do you know? pp. 16-21.
· Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213-238.
· Wellman, B., Boase, J. & Chen, W. (2002). The networked nature of community: Online and offline. IT & Society, 1(1), 151-165. Available online at: http://www.stanford.edu/group/siqss/itandsociety/v01i01/v01i01a10.pdf
· Haythornthwaite, C. (forthcoming). Social networks and online community.
· Haythornthwaite, C. & Wellman, B. (1998).Work, friendship and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1101-1114.
· Burkhardt, M.E. & Brass, D.J. (1990). Changing patterns and patterns of change - The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. ASQ, 35(1), 104-127. OR Burkhardt, M.E. (1994). Social interaction effects following a technological change: A longitudinal investigation. Academy of Management Journal, 37 (4), 104-127.
· Barley, Stephen R. (1990). The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (March), 61-103.
· Haythornthwaite, C. (2001). Exploring multiplexity: Social network structures in a computer-supported distance learning class. The Information Society, 17(3), 211-226.
· Carley, K.M. (1999). On the evolution of social and organizational networks. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 3-30.
· D&F, chpt 7: Dynamics
· Gladwell, M. (1999) The Science of the Sleeper: How the Information Age could blow away the blockbuster. The New Yorker, October 4, 1999. http://www.gladwell.com/1999/1999_10_04_a_sleeper.htm
· Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation. Free Press. Chapter 8
· Monge & Contractor, chpt 6, Contagion, semantic and cognitive theories
· Moreland, R.L. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In L. Thompson, D. Messick, & J. Levine (eds). Sharing knowledge in organizations (pp.3-31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. OR Hollingshead, A.B., Fulk, J., & Monge, P. (2002). Fostering intranet knowledge-sharing: An integration of transactive memory and public goods approaches. In S. Kiesler & R. Hines (eds). Distributed work: New research on working across distance using technology (pp. 335-355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
· Borgatti, S. & Cross, R. (2003). A social network view of organizational learning: relational and structural dimensions of ‘know who.’ Management Science, 49, 432-445.
· Cross, R., Parker, A., Prusak, L. & Borgatti, S.P. (2001). Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 100-120.
· Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82-111.
· Argote, L. McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Introduction to the special issue on managing knowledge in organizations: Creating, retaining,and transferring knowledge. Management Science, 49(4), v-viii.
· Borgatti, S.P. & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.
· Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. ASQ, 45(3), 425-455.
· Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Building social networks via computer networks: Creating and sustaining distributed learning communities. In K.A. Renninger & W. Shumar, Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace (pp.159-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [http://classweb.lis.uiuc.edu/~haythorn/hay_bvc.html]
· Cross, R., Borgatti, S. & Parker, A. (2002). Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Review, 44(2), 25-46. [see also The Hidden Power of Social Networks]
· Teigland, R. (2000). Communities of practice at an Internet firm: Netovation vs. on-time performance. In E.L. Lesser, M.A. Fontaine & J.A. Slusher (Eds.). Knowledge and Communities (pp.151-178). Boston, MA: Butterworth Heinemann.