Discussions regarding the strength of social ties relate to social capital theory. As Robert Putnam describes it, social capital theory suggests that social networks have value at the micro (individual), meso (community), and macro (societal) levels. An individual\u27s social network is comprised of multiple, multiplex social ties of varying strengths. Strong ties exist among individuals connected within densely knit, homogenous networks such as those involving kin and close friends. Weak ties exist among individuals connected within sparse, heterogeneous networks such as those involving acquaintances

Rademacher, Mark A.

Wang, Kevin Y.

Digital Commons @ Butler University

Butler UniversityDigital Commons @ Butler UniversityScholarship and Professional Work -Communication College of Communication2014Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-TieSocial ConnectionsMark A. RademacherButler University, mrademac@butler.eduKevin Y. WangButler University, kwang@butler.eduFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/ccom_papersPart of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, and the Social MediaCommonsThis Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Communication at Digital Commons @ Butler University. It has beenaccepted for inclusion in Scholarship and Professional Work - Communication by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ ButlerUniversity. For more information, please contact fgaede@butler.edu.Recommended CitationRademacher, Mark A. and Wang, Kevin Y., "Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections" (2014). Scholarshipand Professional Work - Communication. Paper 103.http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/ccom_papers/103Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections 1213 Political Implications The Streisand effect matters politically to the extent that incumbent powers, governments, corporations, and famous individuals have less latitude to prevent public criticism through prior constraint, censorship, or lawsuits. It shows that previous instruments of controlling information are outmoded. Over the long term, it may prove more valuable to simply ignore criticism, given the problem of information overload. Similarly, some could flood the public with countervailing messages to cause confusion. Or, powers could seek changes to the law to allow for more secrecy around attempts at suppression, thereby solving the paradox of the Streisand effect. William Lafi Youmans George Washington University See Also: Berkman Center; Demand Progress; Morozov Principle; Social Media and Freedom of Information Act; United States; Wikipedia; WikiLeaks. Further Readings California Coastal Records Project. http://www .californiacoastline.org (Accessed April 2013 ). Chilling Effects Clearinghouse. http://chillingeffects .org (Accessed April 2013). MacKinnon, Rebecca. Consent of the Networked. New York: Basic Books, 2012. Masnick, Mike. "Since When Is It Illegal to Just Mention a Trademark Online?" Techdirt. http:// www.techdirt.com/articles/20050105/0132239 .shtml (Accessed April 2013 ). Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections Discussions regarding the strength of social ties relate to social capital theory. As Robert Put-nam describes it, social capital theory suggests that social networks have value at the micro (individual), meso (community), and macro (societal) levels. An individual's social network is comprised of multiple, multiplex social ties of varying strengths. Strong ties exist among indi-viduals connected within densely knit, homog-enous networks such as those involving kin and close friends. Weak ties exist among individuals connected within sparse, heterogeneous networks such as those involving acquaintances. Strong and weak ties, according to Mark Granovetter, are both important because they connect individuals to valuable resources (e.g., information or opportunities). The utility of strong and weak ties varies, however, as a func-tion of the particular situational context in which it is utilized. The different utility of strong and weak has been widely debated as a result of the implications of tie strength for a wide variety of social and psychological outcomes, such as psy-chological well being, social capital and cohesion, job opportunities and social mobility, and politi-cal and civic engagement. This debate has, been amplified by the emergence and influence of new technology, especially social media. Strong Versus Weak Ties As Granovetter posits, the strength of any tie is a function of the frequency and duration of inter-action, level of emotional intensity and intimacy, and the reciprocal services found within the tie. On a continuum, strong ties involve more fre-quent interaction, emotional intensity and inti-macy, and feelings of reciprocity. Strong ties are often homophilous in nature. That is, they form among individuals who share similar cul-tural, demographic, or attitudinal characteristics. According to Granovetter, the stronger the tie, the more homophilous the tie. This relationship results in a densely knit, exclusive social network where those connected via strong ties also share other friends-friendship circles tend to overlap. Weak ties exist on the opposite end of the con-tinuum. Weak ties involve less frequent interac-tion, lower levels of emotional intensity and inti-macy, and lower feelings of reciprocity. Moreover weak ties are less homophilous than strong ties. That is, they form among individuals who share varied cultural, demographic, or attitudinal char-acteristics. Consequently, weak ties represent a relatively heterogeneous, sparsely knit social 1214 Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections network. This relationship results in a sparsely knit, inclusive social network where those con-nected via weak ties rarely share other friends-friendship circles tend to remain distinct. The Strength of Strong Ties Historical comparisons of strong and weak ties have typically concluded strong ties connect indi-viduals to be more beneficial social and psycho-logical resources than weak ties. Their "bonding" function has been especially heralded. That is, strong ties strengthen interpersonal relationships, resulting in increased feelings of reciprocity and trust. This cultivates feelings of social solidarity and overall social cohesion. From this perspec-tive, strong ties reflect Fredinand Tonnie's con-ceptualization of Gemeinschaft-a geographi-cally bound community characterized by a strong sense of togetherness and moral obligation. This generates greater motivation to provide assistance to strong ties during times of need. For example, it is often easier to convince family and friends to help one move across town than it is to convince an acquaintance to help. Because of their distinct characteristics also strong ties can possess certain negative aspects. As Putnam suggests, strong ties can result in antisocial outcomes such as sectarianism, eth-nocentrism, and corruption. They can also cul-tivate exclusive identities and a narrow sense of self. Granovetter also suggests that although strong ties breed local cohesion, they do so at the expense of the exchange of opportunities and information with diverse others. Their insular and exclusionary nature, therefore, contributes to social isolation and the overall fragmentation of society. The Strength of Weak Ties Weak ties can also be utilized to connect indi-viduals to valuable resources. Granovetter is a strong advocate for the "strength of weak ties," suggesting that they serve an important "bridg-ing" function. That is, weak ties foster connec-tions across cliques or subgroups, opening paths for the rapid and efficient exchange of oppor-tunities and information across social distance. Granovetter suggests that certain weak ties rep-resent "local bridges" -the most efficient links between social groups because they minimize the amount of time, energy, and potential for mes-sage distortion. Weak ties connect heterogeneous individuals to valuable resources unavailable within the densely knit, exclusionary structure of one's close ties. And while all weak ties are not necessarily bridges, strong ties, by definition, cannot serve a bridging function. Such interac-tion and sharing across heterogeneous weak ties can therefore be viewed as contributing to social integration and cohesion. Historical and contemporary critiques of weak ties originate from the belief that they lack the feelings of reciprocity and trust characteristic of strong ties. From this perspective, weak ties mir-ror Tonnie's conceptualization of Gesellschaft-a community comprised of fluid, contractual, and instrumental relationships based on.. individual self-interest-and cultivates individ~alism and feelings of social alienation. The Changing Nature of Social Ties Concerns about the balance of strong to weak ties within individuals' social networks have existed since the Industrial Revolution. These concerns originated as a result of urbanization, improve-ments to transportation and communication networks and technology, and the emergence of consumer culture, among other factors. As Barry Wellman has documented, these changes have initiated a social shift from what he terms "neighborhood-based communities" to "person-to-person" communities. Geographically bound, densely knit communities of strong ties have not been replaced, but are rather supplemented by "far-flung, loosely-bounded, sparsely-knit and fragmentary" communities comprised of self-selected strong and weak ties. Individuals actively create communities of kin, neighbors, friends, coworkers, and various other acquaintances who share interests. The emergence of "person-to-person" commu-nities has been met with some trepidation. Critics fear that these communities of "limited liability" lack the same sense of reciprocity and trust present among strong ties. They fear consequences such as diminished face-to-face interaction, increased feelings of alienation, lower levels of social cohe-sion, and diminished life satisfaction. Yet, far from signaling a definitive shift from Gemein-schaft to Gesellschaft, Wellman argues that new Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections 1215 forms of community coexist with and supplement pre-existing modes, much like strong and weak ties coexist and supplement one another. Tie Strength and Social Media Initial analyses of the effect of social media on tie strength echoed concerns previously raised. Critics bemoaned the geographically dispersed, anonymous, and voluntary nature of social ties predicated on shared interests. The integration of social media into daily life only amplified con-cerns regarding diminished opportunities for face-to-face interaction. The technological fea-tures of social media (e.g., enabling both synchro-nous and asynchronous interaction) also raised concerns regarding its ability to convey emotion and cultivate feelings of reciprocity and trust. Essentially, critiques concluded that ties created and maintained online via social media were less supportive and beneficial than those created and maintained offline. Current thinking, however, presents a more balanced view. Studies of social media, specifi-cally social networking sites (SNSs) such as Face-book, conclude that SNSs support sociability and quality social ties in a similar fashion to face-to-face and geographically based social interactions. Such findings emerge from the fact that SNSs are more often used for tie maintenance, rather than creation. That is, individuals rely on SNSs to maintain existing offline ties, rather than creat-ing connections with anonymous, online others. Often, online interaction fosters offline interac-tion, such as when friends coordinate face-to-face meetings via social media. SNS "friends" are therefore more likely to include family members, close friends, coworkers, and old high school friends than individuals who share some inter-est, but had not met offline prior to "friending" one another. Caroline Haythornthwaite has pos-ited that many SNS-based ties may not actually exist without SNSs. These "latent ties" -ties that remain meaningful but suffer from a lack of fre-quent interaction--can actually be strengthened as a result of social media-based interaction. That is, interaction via social media holds the potential to improve tie strength by converting latent ties into weak ties and weak ties into strong(er) ties. Malcolm Gladwell and Clay Shirky's debate regarding the role of social media and tie strength in contemporary political activism reflects these divergent perspectives. Gladwell argues that social media are a weak-tie phenomenon capa-ble of increasing participation in social causes by facilitating collaboration, coordination, and the expression of ideas. However, it does so by decreasing the level of financial or personal risk involved in participation. According to Gladwell, high-risk activism is a strong-tie phenomenon, and therefore is absent in social media activism. Shirky argues that social media is integral in high-risk activism, irrespective of the strength of ties present within a network. As he argues, social media strategies connect committed social actors and create new strategies and bonds that facilitate social change. Specifically, social media increase access to information and the ability to respond to information on a massive and rapid scale, which helps actors coordinate and demand social change. Shirky acknowledges that super-ficial social media activism exists, but concludes based on anecdotal evidence from recent social movements that social media represents a vital tool capable of strengthening civil society and the public sphere in the long term. Implications of Tie Strength In the absence of empirical evidence, the Gladwell and Shirky debate remains unresolved, but illus-trates that the composition of social networks and the integration of social media into their mainte-nance and functioning has numerous implications for political and civic life. As Putnam proposes, for a democracy to properly function social capi-tal must be managed to maximize the positive consequences while minimizing the negative con-sequences. This logic holds, regardless of whether democratic discourse and functions occur offline or online. Tie strength, for instance, influences the likeli-hood and nature of political discussion and civic deliberation. It is more likely to occur among close ties, but discourse may be limited to topics relevant and/or acceptable within the local com-munity. Close ties may also exert undue social pressure to conform one's thinking to the group norm, or to adopt more extreme views than under other circumstances. Weak ties play an opposite role in this process. Such discourse may occur less among weak ties, but more diverse perspectives 1216 StumbleUpon and inclusive worldviews can result instead in partisanship, polarization, and political bickering. Active political discussion and civic delibera-tion contributes to social cohesion and the for-mulation of a local identity and political and civic participation. This may manifest itself as a commitment to a community, or through involvement in community organizations. The rise of "person-to-person" communities compli-cates this relationship, because increased connec-tions to weak ties may shift one's primary local identity and engagement from geographically bound communities to geographically dispersed communities. Strong ties, especially those that are geographi-cally proximal and benefit from frequent inter-action, may be more easily mobilized to achieve collective goals than geographically dispersed weak ties. However, when social networks are comprised of too many strong ties, it becomes less effective at mobilizing individuals outside of the close ties to their cause. Hence, it becomes necessary to mobilize both strong and weak ties to achieve desired individual and communal ends within and across communities. Conclusion Current thinking concludes that tie strength is not indicative of more or less beneficial social ties. Both are capable of promoting political and civic participation because they help individu-als gain relevant information, create meaningful interpersonal relationships, and coordinate to achieve individual and collective goals. But it is only through the combined resources made acces-sible via both strong and weak ties, complete with their ability to provide bonding and bridging social capital, that individuals, communities, and society at large gain the resources needed to fully and efficiently participate in a democratic society. Social media supplements, rather than detract from, this process. Mark A. Rademacher Kevin Y. Wang Butler University See Also: Evolution of Social Media; Facebook; Network Influentials; Social Capital; Social Networking Websites. Further Readings Gladwell, Malcolm. "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted." The New Yorker (October 4, 2010). Granovetter, Mark S. "The Strength of Weak Ties." American Journal of Sociology, v.7816 (1973). Haythornthwaite, Caroline. "Social Networks and Internet Connectivity Effects." Information, Communication, & Society, v.8 (2005). Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000. Shirky, Clay. "The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change." Foreign Affairs, v.9011 (2011 ). Wellman, Barry. "Physical Place and Cyberspace: The Rise of Personalized Networking." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, v.2512 (2001). StumbleUpon StumbleUpon calls itself "a discovery engine that finds and recommends Web content to its users." In fact, it is a Web search engine that allow users to discover and rate Web pages, Facebook posts, Twitter updates, photos, videos, and all other Web content that is personalized to their tastes and interests using peer-sourcing and social-net-working principles. To monitor a users' browsing, toolbar versions of the service are available for all major browsers and mobile operating systems. Founded in 2001, StumbleUpon had 1 million users by December 2002. In 2012, the Web ser-vice claimed 25 million registered users. Technology and Derivatives Web 2.0, the current phase of the World Wide Web and online applications, is characterized by inter-active and dynamic content. Web 3.0 is assumed to comprise the following opportunities: a hybrid, semantic, and intelligent Web made possible by the convergence of several new technologies, which will make data and content more usable and accessible. When the World Wide Web changed from 1.0 to 2.0 to 3.0, the user changed, respec-tively, from a viewer, to a producer/prosumer, 

Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections

http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=ccom_papers

Strong-Tie Social Connections Versus Weak-Tie Social Connections

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital Commons @ Butler University