Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades

Have the core discussion networks of Americans changed in the past two decades? In 1985, the General Social Survey (GSS) collected the first nationally representative data on the confidants with whom Americans discuss important matters. In the 2004 GSS the authors replicated those questions to assess social change in core network structures. Discussion networks are smaller in 2004 than in 1985. The number of people saying there is no one with whom they discuss important matters nearly tripled. The mean network size decreases by about a third (one confidant), from 2.94 in 1985 to 2.08 in 2004. The modal respondent now reports having no confidant; the modal respondent in 1985 had three confidants. Both kin and non-kin confidants were lost in the past two decades, but the greater decrease of non-kin ties leads to more confidant networks centered on spouses and parents, with fewer contacts through voluntary associations and neighborhoods. Most people have densely interconnected confidants similar to them. Some changes reflect the changing demographics of the U.S. population. Educational heterogeneity of social ties has decreased, racial heterogeneity has increased. The data may overestimate the number of social isolates, but these shrinking networks reflect an important social change in America

[1]  RE Appleton,et al.  The Voluntary Associations , 1969 .

[2]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[3]  L. Verbrugge The Structure of Adult Friendship Choices , 1977 .

[4]  B. Wellman The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yorkers , 1979, American Journal of Sociology.

[5]  Lynn Smith-Lovin,et al.  Women and Weak Ties: Differences by Sex in the Size of Voluntary Organizations , 1982, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  P. Killworth,et al.  Informant accuracy in social-network data V. An experimental attempt to predict actual communication from recall data☆ , 1982 .

[7]  N. Milburn To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. , 1983 .

[8]  M. McPherson An Ecology of Affiliation , 1983 .

[9]  Ronald S. Burt,et al.  Network items and the general social survey , 1984 .

[10]  Ronald S. Burt,et al.  A note on sociometric order in the general social survey network data , 1986 .

[11]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  Core Discussion Networks of Americans , 1987 .

[12]  L. Freeman,et al.  Cognitive Structure and Informant Accuracy , 1987 .

[13]  Robert J. Sampson,et al.  Crime and Deviance Over the Life Course: The Salience of Adult Social Bonds , 1990 .

[14]  G. Moore Structural Determinants of Men's and Women's Personal Networks , 1990 .

[15]  B. Wellman,et al.  Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support , 1990, American Journal of Sociology.

[16]  J. M. McPherson,et al.  Evolution on a Dancing Landscape: Organizations and Networks in Dynamic Blau Space , 1991 .

[17]  J. M. McPherson,et al.  Social Networks and Organizational Dynamics , 1992 .

[18]  Tom W. Smith Thoughts on the Nature of Context Effects , 1992 .

[19]  Paula England,et al.  Theory on gender/feminism on theory , 1993 .

[20]  D. Brewer,et al.  The social structural basis of the organization of persons in memory , 1995, Human nature.

[21]  R. Putnam Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital , 1995, The City Reader.

[22]  Arlie Russell Hochschild,et al.  The Time Bind , 1997 .

[23]  R. Burt A note on social capital and network content , 1997 .

[24]  Danching Ruan,et al.  The content of the General Social Survey discussion networks : an exploration of General Social Survey discussion name generator in a Chinese context , 1998 .

[25]  Peter V. Marsden,et al.  Interpretation and interview context: examining the General Social Survey name generator using cognitive methods , 1999, Soc. Networks.

[26]  Pamela Paxton Is Social Capital Declining in the United States? A Multiple Indicator Assessment1 , 1999, American Journal of Sociology.

[27]  Thomas Rotolo Trends in Voluntary Association Participation , 1999 .

[28]  Valerie A. Haines,et al.  Core Networks and Tie Activation: What Kinds of Routine Networks Allocate Resources in Nonroutine Situations? , 2000, American Sociological Review.

[29]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.

[30]  Bruce C. Straits,et al.  Ego's important discussants or significant people: an experiment in varying the wording of personal network name generators , 2000, Soc. Networks.

[31]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[32]  M. McPherson,et al.  BIRDS OF A FEATHER: Homophily , 2001 .

[33]  N. Lin Social Capital: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[34]  Jerry A. Jacobs,et al.  Overworked Individuals or Overworked Families? , 2001 .

[35]  B. Wellman,et al.  The Internet in everyday life , 2002 .

[36]  Jonathan Gershuny Web Use and Net Nerds: A Neofunctionalist Analysis of the Impact of Information Technology in the Home , 2003 .

[37]  Robin I. M. Dunbar,et al.  Social network size in humans , 2003, Human nature.

[38]  P. Bearman,et al.  Cloning Headless Frogs and Other Important Matters: Conversation Topics and Network Structure , 2004 .

[39]  Alexandra Marin,et al.  Are respondents more likely to list alters with certain characteristics?: Implications for name generator data , 2004, Soc. Networks.

[40]  M. McPherson A Blau space primer: prolegomenon to an ecology of affiliation , 2004 .

[41]  Alain Degenne Social capital: a theory of social structure and action , 2004 .

[42]  P. Bearman,et al.  Suicide and friendships among American adolescents. , 2004, American journal of public health.

[43]  John Wilson,et al.  What Happened to the "Long Civic Generation"? Explaining Cohort Differences in Volunteerism , 2004 .

[44]  Robert J. Sampson,et al.  Neighbourhood and Community , 2004 .

[45]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Models and methods in social network analysis , 2005 .

[46]  R. Sampson,et al.  Civil Society Reconsidered: The Durable Nature and Community Structure of Collective Civic Action1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[47]  Anuška Ferligoj,et al.  The quality of measurement of personal support subnetworks , 2005 .

[48]  Claude S. Fischer,et al.  Bowling Alone: What's the Score? , 2005, Soc. Networks.

[49]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis: Recent Developments in Network Measurement , 2005 .

[50]  Tracy L. M. Kennedy,et al.  Connected Lives: The Project1 , 2006 .

[51]  Barry Wellman,et al.  Strength of Internet Ties, The , 2006 .

[52]  N. Nie,et al.  Internet Use, Interpersonal Relations, and Sociability: A Time Diary Study , 2008 .