Gender Approach to Network

You are Who you know: a network approach to gender
Most social theories characterize actors in terms of their individual attributes however network approach focuses on the fact that actors are only understood in terms of their relationships to one another
Impossible to have a network theory of gender
Network theory views actors as identically endowed and interchangeable nodes
How can we apply a theoretical percepective based on relationships to an individual attribute like gender
West and Fenstermaker- gender is an interactional accomplishment
If you view it as an individual attribute you reduce gender to biological sex
Network perspective suggests that much of what we characterize as masc or fem is the product of social relationships
The structural position which is defined by relationships affect perceptions, beliefs, resources etc ---
Psychologists and economists believe people have significant attributes that affect behaviour in response to social situation
Micro economic theory- people have preferences and choices are made within constraints (such as the prices in the market)
Constraints also include endowments like biologically inherited abilities or resources given at birth
Men and women are said to face the same market constraints
Men and women make different decisions because they have different tastes or they are maximizing utility
In network perspective- preferences of humans are NOT exogenous to the system (don’t change as the result of ones position or relations with others)
Instead, preferences are determines by the relationships in which a person is embedded
Network perspective also elaborates the economic view, makes us think about the local rationality created by ones network position
Economics: recognize ppl make choices based on limited info but take the distribution of info as given and consider on the cost of acquiring more
Network: highlights how info availability is structured and what we know is function of relationships with others
Psychological and biological: individuals have gender differentiated traits
Adult men and women are different
Therefore they respond differently in the same social situations
Pgs 225-226 not here
Pg. 27-
Multivariate character to relationship between the distribution of attributes and heterogeneity of ego networks
Heterogeneity measured in 2 ways
Focus on diversity, focs on intergroup relations
Distinction between relational and attribute anaylsis
Structural Variables
If you keep the relational character of the matrix of connections between the elements, it allows an analysis of network structure
You can see what ties are present and absent
Useful to see the outcomes for individuals
Absence of ties is just as critical to the structure as the presence of ties
Homophily: extent to which similar nodes are more likely to have a relationship then dissimilar nodes
E.g. if two white ppl are more likely to become friends then a white and a black- its homophilous
Concept doesn’t imply that the similarity between linked nodes is a function of individual choice- may arise because of ecological forces
Positions within a network are defined by the patterns of relations among actors
Network positions have much in common with traditional concepts of role and status in sociology
Network anaylsis is a formal definition of social position in terms of the realtions it entails instead of a defn that is distinct from individuals and their attributes
2 ways to identify network positions
1) social cohesion- actors occupy the same position to the defree that they are connected directly to one another
2) identifies equivalent positions in the social structure which may not be connected
Matters graphs are labelled or not
Labelled graphs: 2 actors are said to occupy the same structural position (structural equivalence) when they are connected to the same other actors
E.g. 2 teachers in uni are structurally equivalent to the extent that they teach the same students and have the same chairperson and dean
Identity of the ppl to whim the coal actors are tied is retained
Unlabeled- examines the way that an actor is connected to others rather then to which others
Isomorphic actors in unlabeled sense are said to be role equivalent cuz they have the same types of relations to similar others
E.g. 2 teachers would be role equivalent if they had the same types of relations with students etc even if they were in diff unis
2 actors are role equivalent when they are linked in similar ways to the same positions
Unlabeled is completely structural
Actors can be equivalent to one another if they have similar positions even if they are distant or unreachable from each other
Hypernetwork: generated whenever there exists a set of elements, linked together by a set of relations (ie. membership in organization) when that relation also defines a new set of elements (orgs) that are linked by relations defined by the 1st set of elements (individuals)
Relate elements at 2 levels of analysis defining the connections between elements at each level in terms of the other
Gender Related Research Questions
Many questions
Review of literature:
Research shows that homophily by gender in early ties to playmates and some subtle tendencies to respond differently to network structures lead men and women to have different network structures and worlds in school years
Different location in social structure and womens greater involvement in childrearing produce movement by women into kin-related rather then occupationally related flows of info and opportunity
Women see the world as organized around family and household
Men participate in flows abt career, money, recreational pursuits
Small differences in access to info will accumulate over the course of a career to produce large differences in attainment
We can observe gender differences in aspirations and values that appear to be affecting their careers- however relationship is spurious bc both beliefs and career outcomes depend on the structure of network constacts
Men and women are located in different regions of the network
Networks in Childhood
Learn gender is personal characteristic when enter school
Choose companions that are the same- homophily
Girls play in smaller groups then boys
Children show less tolerance for intransitivity when age
Intransitivity- A likes B and B likes C but A doesn’t like C
Girls deal with it by deleting friends while boys are more likely to add
Pgs 231-232 NA
233-
Personal Networks in Adult Years
Life is a sequence of incredibly diverse organizational settings, the coordination of which determines almost all outcomes for the individual
One experience change determines the next
Each family, school experience determines access to educational orgs, affect labor force experience, determine career
Social networks are generated by organization bc they develop the settings in which onctacts develop
Networks modify the flow of ppl from one setting to another
Men and women have similar size networks
Networks show strong homofily
Women have more ties to fam and neighbourhood and men to coworkers
Depend on opportunities for social contact