The Social Network Approach
Social network perspectives focus on the structure of social systems and how the elements of a social system come together. Individual characteristics are only part of the story, the people influence each other, and ideas and materials flow throughout the network. From the network perspective, the social environment can be expressed as patterns or regularities in relationships among interacting units. These patterns are often called structure. The current section elaborates some of the network concepts and terminology used in the subsequent methods for the analysis of MUVWs.
The form of social network that will be utilized in this chapter is a communication network, defined as the patterns of contact that are created by the flow of messages among communicators through time and space (see Monge & Contractor, 2003; Rogers & Kincaid, 1981). Communication network analysis identifies the communication flow, or communication structure. Relation ties (linkages) between actors are channels for the transfer (flow) of either material or nonmaterial resources, or for an association between actors, such as a friendship tie. The ties that exist between the nodes can vary along several elements, including strength, direction, and reciprocity.
Links between actors can be measured as being either non-directional or directional. If the link is directional but there is not the same value of relation the link is asymmetrical and lacks reciprocity. Non-directional links simply indicate an association of two actors in a shared partnership, such as two students being part of the same class. Links that are directional indicate the movement from one point to another, such as the number of phone calls one person makes to another, or the degree of liking one person has for another. Additionally, these links can also be symmetrical or asymmetrical. There are several measures of how connected individual nodes are, as well as how connected the entire network is, discussed below
Degree Centrality
The degree measure of centrality is calculated by counting the number of adjacent links to or from an actor in a network (Brass & Burkhardt, 1992). Freeman (1979) conceptualized this measure as an indicator of individual activity, representing the number of alternatives available to an individual in the network.
Degree centrality may also be appropriate for capturing such power-enhancing behaviors that happen via direct interaction, such as integration and reciprocation. Likewise, degree centrality can also indicate other direct interactions such as coalitions and the avoidance of relying on mediating actors for indirect access to resources (Brass & Burkhardt, 1992). While a relatively straightforward measure, degree centrality provides insight into individual contributions to the interconnectedness of the overall network (Rogers & Kincaid, 1981).