Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet
icon backReturn to Entries

Children's Networks

The examination of children's networks can concentrate broadly on the overall structure of relationships between children or more narrowly on individual children's placement within this relational structure. Interest in this topic dates back to Jacob Moreno's foundational work in the 1930s on the preferred seating companions of kindergarten through eighth grade students. Since this time, investigations of children's networks have tackled issues of measurement and have addressed a vast array of research questions. Among the most common questions are (1) what do children's networks look like across developmental periods and (2) how are children's network positions associated with behavior and other indicators of social status?

Researchers interested in children's networks face several decision points related to measurement. First, they must determine where to set the boundaries of the network system. Second, they must decide what constitutes a relationship between children. Third, they must choose a source from which to derive data on these relationships.

Setting the Boundaries of the Network

As is customary in all network studies, research on children's networks requires investigators to specify the boundaries of the network system. That is, where does the network system begin and end, and who should be counted as members? Most commonly, studies have measured networks in the context of schools, where children spend a large amount of their time and form a considerable share of their peer relationships. These studies vary with respect to whether they set network boundaries at the classroom, grade, or school level, with decisions depending, in part, on assumptions about the existence and importance of cross-grade and cross-classroom relationships. For example, in the United States, because children in elementary schools spend most of their day in one classroom with the same classmates, it is often appropriate to set network boundaries at the classroom level. In contrast, because children in middle schools and high schools often switch classrooms several times throughout the day, it may be more appropriate to set network boundaries at the grade or school level. Identifying members of the network is relatively clear-cut because schools are closed systems where members are usually easily documented by existing rosters.

Although research on school-based relationships has dominated the literature on children's networks, additional research is needed on children's networks in other important settings, including neighborhoods, after-school activities such as clubs and organized sports, and summer camps. For instance, children's school-based and out-of-school networks demonstrate limited overlap and are uniquely associated with behaviors, suggesting that these two types of networks represent distinct contexts for children. Given that children and adolescents are spending an increasing amount of time in virtual environments, recent research has also started to examine youth interactions on Internet social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace.

Relationships between Children

In addition to setting network boundaries, researchers must decide how to define relationships between children. That is, what content should be used to establish the presence or absence of network relationships? In the literature on children's networks, researchers usually define network relationships by friendship or affiliation. Friendship networks assess which children are friends with one another, thus capturing exchanges of social and emotional resources like social support. In contrast, affiliation networks assess which children “hang out” together, thus focusing on relations of physical co-location. Although these conceptual distinctions appear fine-grained, empirical research has demonstrated that friendship and affiliation networks have limited overlap and look different. For example, friendship networks have more isolates (individuals who have no relationships with peers) and are less stable (less likely to persist over time) than affiliation networks. Moreover, although friendship networks can be asymmetric (as in the case of unrequited friendships), affiliation networks generally assume symmetry. Beyond networks of friendship and affiliation, research on adolescents has also examined romantic and sexual networks. These networks are important for understanding the development of romantic relationships as well as disease transmission.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Read next

More like this

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

close

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

close
close
close Signed In to profile You are signed in as:
close
Logged in Institution Institution