Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-89wxm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T13:07:03.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Simulating the Social Networks and Interactions of Poor Immigrants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Bruce Rogers
Affiliation:
St. Louis, Missouri and Statistical and Applied Mathematical Sciences Institute
Cecilia Menjívar
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Silvia Domínguez
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Betina Hollstein
Affiliation:
Universität Bremen
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In social science disciplines the term “mixed methods” usually refers to studies that rely on a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods: on one hand, techniques that rely on small samples and seek to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular situation and the meanings individuals attach to it, and on the other, techniques based on randomized samples that permit the detection of patterns and create generalizable results. In this chapter we propose a different kind of “mixed method” analysis: one that incorporates data generated through qualitative techniques of participant observation and in-depth interviewing with agent-based modeling. The data of interest are the social networks of a local community of Salvadoran immigrants, and we base computer simulations of the networks on an earlier qualitative study by one of the authors. In order to capture the dynamics of the immigrants’ social network, describe reciprocity between actors, and understand how information affects access to resources, we use a sequential exploratory design, which, as Hollstein notes in the introduction to this volume, helps to explain conditions under which certain patterns take place and the consequences they can have. We start with qualitative observations that then inform computer simulations that generate data. The qualitative study shows how expectations of reciprocity can weaken social networks in poor communities, and the computer simulations show how adjusting the social cost of failing to reciprocate affects the density of the social networks. Thus, our chapter highlights a fundamental aspect for mixed methods research – that is, the integration of analysis at key stages in the process. As Hollstein (this volume) observes, it is this integration, in contrast to simply combining data or analyses, that is key to mixed methods studies. Also, importantly, the use of computer simulations allows the researcher to conduct experiments in silica that are impossible in the real world, such as changing the economic environment or the weight of social costs. The qualitative study sheds light on social mechanisms, and computer experiments explore those mechanisms in situations other than the ones actually observed.

Type
Chapter
Information
Mixed Methods Social Networks Research
Design and Applications
, pp. 336 - 356
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aragones, Ana Maria and Dunn, Timothy. 2005. “Trabajadores indocumentados y nuevos destinos migratorios en la globalización.” Política y Cultura 23:43–65.Google Scholar
Ari, Lilach Lev. 2006. “Who gains, who loses? Social mobility and absorbtion through emigration to the US, among Israeli men and women.” Social Issues in Israel 1(2):5–44.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert 1997. The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and Collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bashi, Vilna Francine. 2007. Survival of the Knitted: Immigrant Social Networks in a Stratified World. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bowles, Samuel and Gintis, Herbert. 2004. “The evolution of strong reciprocity: Cooperation in heterogeneous populations.” Theoretical Population Biology 75:17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cialdini, Robert. 1984. Influence: How and Why People Agree to Things. New York: William Arrow and Co.Google Scholar
Collyer, Michael. 2005. “When do social networks fail to explain migration?: Accounting for the movement of Algerian asylum-seekers to the UK.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. 31(4):699–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vos, Hank, Samniotto, Rita, and Elsas, Donald. 2001. “Reciprocal altruism under conditions of partner selection.” Rationality and Society. 13(2):139–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delany, John. 1988. “Social networks and efficient resource allocation: Computer models of job vacancy allocation through contacts.” Pp. 430–51 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, edited by Wellman, Barry and Berkowitz, Stephen D.. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fehr, Ernst and Gachter, Simon. 2000. “Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(3):159–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flache, Andreas. 2001. “Individual risk preferences and collective outcomes in the evolution of exchange networks.” Rationality and Society. 13(3):304–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouldner, Alvin W. 1960. “The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement.” American Sociological Review 25(2):161–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. “The strength of weak ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78(6):1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, William A. 2005. “Using-agent based modeling to simulate the influence of family-level stress on disease progression.” Pp. 291–315 in Handbook of Families and Health: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Russell Crane, D. and Marshall, Elaine S.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. 1951. Morals in Evolution: A Study in Comparative Ethics. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Ilcan, Suzan. 2002. Longing in Belonging: The Cultural Politics of Settlement. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Jasinskaja-Lahti, Inga, Liebkind, Karmela, Jaakkola, Magdalena, and Reuter, Anni. 2006. “Perceived discrimination, social support networks, and psychological well-being among three immigrant groups.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 37(3):293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Ron, Trlin, Andrew, Henderson, Anne, and North, Nicola. 2006. “Sustaining and creating migration chains among skilled immigrant groups: Chinese, Indians and South Africans in New Zealand.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 32(7):1227–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khoo, Siew-Ean. 2003. “Sponsorship of relatives for migration and immigrant settlement intention.” International Migration 41(5):177–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massey, Douglas S., Alarcon, Rafael, Durand, Jorge, and González, Humberto. 1990. Return to Aztlan: The Social Process of International Migration from Western Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
McAllister, Ryan, Gordon, Ian, Janssen, Marco, and Abel, Nick. 2005. “Pastoralists’ response to variation of rangeland resources in time and space.” Ecological Applications 16(2):572–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, Angela. 2005. “’Bands of fellowship’: The role of personal relationships and social networks among Irish migrants in New Zealand, 1861–1911.’’Immigrants and Minorities 23(2–3):339–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menjívar, Cecilia. 2000. Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Molm, Linda. 2006. “The social exchange framework.” Pp. 24–40 in Contemporary Social Psychology Theories, edited by Burke, P. J.. Alto, Palo, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Nowak, Martin and May, Robert. 1992. “Evolutionary games and spatial chaos.” Nature 359:826–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piotrowski, Martin. 2006. “The effect of social networks at origin communities on migration remittances: Evidence from Nang Rong District.” European Journal of Population/Revue europeenne de demographie 22(1):67–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portes, Alejandro. 1998. “Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 24:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portes, Alejandro and Sensenbrenner, Julia. 1993. “Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action.” American Journal of Sociology 98(6):1320–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, Rober, Kohler, Timothy, and Kobti, Ziad. 2003. “The effects of generalized reciprocal exchange on the resilience of social networks: An example from the pre-hispanic Mesa Verde region.” Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory 9(3):227–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez, Vicente and Egea, Carmen. 2006. “Return and the social environment of Andalusian emigrants in Europe.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 32(8):1377–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roschelle, Anne. 1997. No More Kin: Exploring Race, Class and Gender in Family Networks. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, Louise. 2007. “Migrant women, social networks and motherhood: The experiences of Irish nurses in Britain.” Sociology 41(2):295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmel, Georg. 1950. The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Translated and edited by Wolff, Kurt H.. Glencoe, IL.: Free Press.Google Scholar
Tsai, Jenny Hsin-Chun. 2006. “Xenophobia, ethnic community, and Immigrant Youths’ Friendship Network formation.” Adolescence 41(162):285–98.Google ScholarPubMed
Waldinger, Roger and Lichter, Michael I.. 2003. How the Other Half Works: Immigration and the Social Organization of Labor. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wong, Daniel, Keung, Fu, and Song, He Xue. 2006. “Dynamics of social support: A longitudinal qualitative study on Mainland Chinese immigrant women’s first year of resettlement in Hong Kong.” Social Work in Mental Health 4(3):83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeggelink, Evelien, Vos, Henk de and Elsas, Donald. 2000. “Reciprocal altruism and group formation: Degree segmentation of reciprocal altruists who prefer ‘old helping partners’.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 3(3): .Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×