English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 54367/62174 (87%)
Visitors : 15030648      Online Users : 169
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTHU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    National Tsing Hua University Institutional Repository > 人文社會學院  > 社會學研究所 > 會議論文 >  The Distinctiveness of Social Resrouce Theory: Positional Network and Resource Hierarchy

    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nthur.lib.nthu.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/75374

    Title: The Distinctiveness of Social Resrouce Theory: Positional Network and Resource Hierarchy
    Authors: Lu-lin Cheng
    教師: 鄭陸霖
    Date: 1998
    Publisher: International Network for Social Network Analysis
    Relation: The XII International Sunbelt Social Network Conference, 1998
    Keywords: Distinctivenes
    Social Resrouce Theory
    Positional Network
    Resource Hierarchy
    Abstract: There are theoretical dissonances in social resource theory. I argue that social resource theory is based on a distinct conception of network utilization, which is incompatible with Granovetter's theoretical logic of the exclusive function of the weak tie as a bridge. To demonstrate this point, I reexamine Granovetter's arguments about the strength of weak tie. Relying on Homans' homophily principle, Granovetter claims that the forbidden triad keeps people from getting heterogeneous resources through the strong tie. In contrast, the main thrust of social resource theory argues that the social resources which are accessible to social agents are determined by the networks where they are located. The speciosity of the theoretical harmony between them is most salient when, for instance, the strong tie of strong tie, which is a typical instrumental action people embrace to access heterogeneous resources, is excluded in Granovetter's theory as never being weak tie, or more specifically, the bridge. Besides this, the erroneous dualistic framework (strong tie, homophily, and expressive action, on the one band; and weak tie, heterophily, and instrumental action, on the other) and the unspecification of the 'network segment,' which are both inherited from Granovetter's theoretical construction, are also reexamined in this article. By recasting the theoretical basis, the internal consistency of social resource theory is strengthened, and its possible discursive relation with both status and class models is clarified. It is in this distinctiveness, we see the promised advancement of social resource theory.
    URI: http://www.insna.org/
    Appears in Collections:[社會學研究所] 會議論文

    Files in This Item:

    There are no files associated with this item.


    SFX Query


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback