Citation

Burt RS. Soc. Netw. 1986; 8(2): 149-189.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1986, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/S0378-8733(86)80002-8

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The people identified as important discussion partners in the GSS network data were cited in order of strength of relationship with respondent; the first cited person having the strongest relation, the second having the next strongest, and so on. On average, the third citation is a turning point. There is a steep, linear decline in relationship strength across the first people cited as discussion partners and a slower, but continuing decline, across the fourth and fifth people cited. Order effects on closeness and contact frequency are described in the context of network size and relation content. There is a kinship bias only in deciding who to name first; spouses tended to be the first discussion partner cited and other kin tended not to be. There is a sex homophily bias across all respondents -- people of one's own sex were cited as discussion partners before members of the opposite sex -- but it emerged differently for men and women. Women, especially married women, expressed sex bias in the people with whom they spent time while men expressed sex bias in the people with whom they felt close. Men claimed closer relations with women than men but in fact listed their important discussion partners in descending order of closeness and began the list with the names of other men. Finally, there is evidence of a co-worker bias in discussion relations beyond the family; respondents tended to mention co-workers as daily contacts but late in their list of important discussion partners. With the exception of the spouse bias, all evidence of content bias is markedly weaker than the consistent tendency for respondents to list discussion relations in descending order of closeness and contact frequency.