Structural Theory

There are at least two major strands of structural theory, differing in their understanding of social structure. Some scholars view it as an explanatory construct that provides the logic behind the observed characteristics. Exponents of this approach have made valuable contributions to the theoretical discussion of social structure, particularly structuralists like Claude Lévi-Strauss but also by exponents of structuralist Marxism and feminism. However, another approach, held by scholars from various social sciences, has made a significant impact on social network analysis. This view considers social structure as the empirically apparent characteristics of a system. In this sense, structural theory is about the explanation of enduring patterns of social behavior in terms of interrelationships between the elements of a social system.

According to José J. López and John Scott, these two distinct, albeit nonexclusive, traditions of thought can be distinguished. On the one hand, structure is conceived as comprising those normative patterns that define the expectations individuals hold about each other and that organize the relations between them. On the other hand, structure is seen as comprising the [Page 830]social relations themselves, which can best be understood as patterns of interdependence among individuals, groups, and organizations, and related patterns of distribution of resources on which their actions depend. Both concepts of institutional and relational structure can be traced back, more or less, to Émile Durkheim, who recognized “collective representations” and “collective relationships” as complementary parts of a social structure.

Durkheim's concept of the regulation of action through commonly shared representations was further developed by structural functionalism. As Talcott Parsons has argued, the patterns of social relations that comprise social structures have to be seen as normative patterns, that is, as social institutions. The main function of these interrelated large-scale and micro institutions, such as collective bargaining and gift giving, is to maintain social equilibrium by socializing individuals into (cultural based, not substantial) norms and values and allocating them to roles in which they will contribute effectively to the running of society. Contrary to this derivation of social relations from social norms, according to early-20th-century sociologist Georg Simmel, society is a process that only comes about through continuous interactions between individuals. As a result of the interdependence and mutual adjustment of their actions, persistent and regular patterns of joint behavior (i.e., common forms of social relationships) emerge, which in turn greatly determine the content of interactions.