4.4 Article

Whom do we lose? The case of dissimilarity in personal networks

Journal

SOCIAL NETWORKS
Volume 65, Issue -, Pages 51-62

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2020.11.003

Keywords

Tie loss; Dissimilarity; Homophily; Meeting opportunities; Preferences; Network embeddedness; Event history models

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study reveals that ties to dissimilar others are more likely to be lost faster, especially in the early stage of relationships. However, whether it is lack of meeting opportunities, preferences for similarity, or network embeddedness, none of these factors can fully explain why ties to dissimilar individuals decay more rapidly than ties to similar individuals.
Previous research finds that individuals tend to form ties with similar others much more often than with dissimilar others. However, we know relatively little about tie loss and to what extent this is driven by (dis)similarity. In this paper, we argue that ties to persons who are dissimilar with regard to gender, age, ethnicity, and education are lost faster than ties to similar persons - and we test three explanations for this faster decay of ties with dissimilar others: lack of meeting opportunities, preferences for similarity, and lower network embeddedness. To test these explanations, we analysed two waves of the Survey on the Social Networks of the Dutch (SSND, 2007, 2014). These SSND-waves contain comprehensive longitudinal panel data on ego networks of 441 respondents, who were interviewed about a wide range of relationships, their alters' sociodemographic characteristics, where and when they met their alters, as well as how and whether they maintain these relationships. We modelled tie loss by event history analyses. Results show that ties to persons who were dissimilar are more likely to be lost faster, and that tie loss occurs mostly in the early years of a relationship. However, meeting opportunities, preferences for similarity, and network embeddedness are unable to explain why ties to dissimilar others are lost faster. We conclude that dissimilarity is a powerful driver of tie loss, and that more arguments and research are needed to fully understand the underlying mechanisms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available