On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure

Researchers in the social and biomedical sciences regularly measure networks spanning entire villages in low- and middle-income countries by documenting the social contacts of just one or two representatives from participating households. This “lean” approach to network measurement is cost-effective...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Simpson, CR
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020
_version_ 1797107398152814592
author Simpson, CR
author_facet Simpson, CR
author_sort Simpson, CR
collection OXFORD
description Researchers in the social and biomedical sciences regularly measure networks spanning entire villages in low- and middle-income countries by documenting the social contacts of just one or two representatives from participating households. This “lean” approach to network measurement is cost-effective compared to a sociometric census of a village’s adult population. However, it implicitly assumes that interviewed and non-interviewed coresidents are structurally equivalent — i.e., directly connected to the same network members in the same fashion. Drawing from research on multilevel networks and intra-household heterogeneity, here I argue that this assumption is unlikely to hold for the personal social ties typically of interest to field researchers (i.e., friends and other preferred sources and targets of material, informational and emotional support). I substantiate my claim with an exploratory case study on the similarity of coresidents’ incoming and outgoing ties using data documenting unrestricted roster-based reports on the provision of tangible aid amongst all adult residents of a remote village of indigenous horticulturalists in Nicaragua (108 adults; 32 nuclear-family households). Results indicate that coresidents markedly deviate from structural equivalence and its generalisation in the form of stochastic equivalence (i.e., similar probabilities of being directly connected to the same network members in the same fashion). All in all, it is ill-advised to assume that the personal network of any one coresident, or, more generally, the manner in which a coresident tends to send and receive their personal ties, is representative of their household.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T07:13:57Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:83084500-e602-4565-bb92-637919041590
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T07:13:57Z
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:83084500-e602-4565-bb92-6379190415902022-07-28T10:31:14ZOn the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structureJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:83084500-e602-4565-bb92-637919041590EnglishSymplectic ElementsElsevier2020Simpson, CRResearchers in the social and biomedical sciences regularly measure networks spanning entire villages in low- and middle-income countries by documenting the social contacts of just one or two representatives from participating households. This “lean” approach to network measurement is cost-effective compared to a sociometric census of a village’s adult population. However, it implicitly assumes that interviewed and non-interviewed coresidents are structurally equivalent — i.e., directly connected to the same network members in the same fashion. Drawing from research on multilevel networks and intra-household heterogeneity, here I argue that this assumption is unlikely to hold for the personal social ties typically of interest to field researchers (i.e., friends and other preferred sources and targets of material, informational and emotional support). I substantiate my claim with an exploratory case study on the similarity of coresidents’ incoming and outgoing ties using data documenting unrestricted roster-based reports on the provision of tangible aid amongst all adult residents of a remote village of indigenous horticulturalists in Nicaragua (108 adults; 32 nuclear-family households). Results indicate that coresidents markedly deviate from structural equivalence and its generalisation in the form of stochastic equivalence (i.e., similar probabilities of being directly connected to the same network members in the same fashion). All in all, it is ill-advised to assume that the personal network of any one coresident, or, more generally, the manner in which a coresident tends to send and receive their personal ties, is representative of their household.
spellingShingle Simpson, CR
On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title_full On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title_fullStr On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title_full_unstemmed On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title_short On the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
title_sort on the structural equivalence of coresidents and the measurement of village social structure
work_keys_str_mv AT simpsoncr onthestructuralequivalenceofcoresidentsandthemeasurementofvillagesocialstructure