Rochelle R. Cote

It's not who you know, it's how you know them: Who exchanges what with whom?☆

Reciprocity - doing for others if they have done for you - is a key way people mobilize resources to deal with daily life and seize opportunities. In principle, reciprocity (the Golden Rule) is a universal norm. In practice, it is variable. Personal networks rarely operate as solidarities and as such, people cannot count on all the members of their networks to provide help all the time. Rather, social support comes uncertainly from a variety of ties in networks. This paper uses survey research to understand the variable and contingent nature of reciprocity and inquires about the kinds of resources exchanged between people. We investigate the extent to which interpersonal ties, network characteristics, and peoples personal characteristics (e.g., gender) affect the nature of reciprocal relationships. The evidence is extraordinarily clear on one subject - giving support is strongly associated with getting it. Analyses show that getting support from network members is the key to East Yorkers reciprocating - usually in kind but sometimes with other forms of support.

Connected Lives: The Project1

Barring the odd beast and monk, just about everyone is connected these days - at most by 6 degrees of interpersonal connection and often by less (Milgram, 1967; Kochen, 1989; Watts, 2003). Yet only a tiny fraction of those who are connected ever interact in any meaningful way as friends, relatives, neighbours, workmates, and acquaintances. These ties comprise our individual personal communities, each a solar system of 10-2000 persons orbiting around us (Wellman, 1979).

Untangling the Roots of Tolerance How Forms of Social Capital Shape Attitudes Toward Ethnic Minorities and Immigrants

Past research suggests that tolerance flows from personal characteristics, diversified networks, and participation in voluntary associations. Earlier studies have never included all of these, so researchers have not explored alternative theoretical accounts of how possible causes of tolerance connect to each other and to tolerance. For example, do association members have more tolerance because association activities meet the conditions of the contact hypothesis,because members are well educated, or because association activity widens ones networks? Furthermore, both associations and social networks vary in the extent to which they provide the experiences theoretically linked to tolerance, so types of associations and types of networks should also have different effects on tolerance. Exploring these and other variations provides an enriched test of theoretical conjectures. Findings from analyses of the 2000 Canadian federal election study show that tolerance is complex, stemming from a combination of social networks, voluntary association activities, and individual attributes.

The effects of gendered social capital on U.S. migration: a comparison of four Latin American countries

This article contributes to understandings of gendered social capital by analyzing the effects of gendered ties on the migration of men and women from four Latin American countries (Mexico, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic) to the United States. The research theorizes the importance of strong and weak ties to men and women in each sending country as a product of the gender equity gap in economic participation (low/high) and incidence of female-led families (low/high). The findings reveal that ties to men increase the odds of migration from countries where gender equity and incidence of female-led families are low, while ties to women are more important for migration from countries where gender equity and female-led families are high. Previous research on migration and social capital details the importance of network ties for providing resources and the role of gender in mediating social capital quality and access to network support. Results reveal that not only are different kinds of ties important to female and male migration, but migrants from different countries look to different sources of social capital for assistance.

Social Networks and Subjective Wellbeing in Australia: New Evidence from a National Survey

The article draws on data from a national survey in Australia in 2014 to examine how social networks affect life satisfaction and happiness. Findings show that social network composition, social attachment, perceived social support and the volume of social resources are significantly positively associated with life satisfaction and happiness. Stress about social commitments, feeling restricted by social demands and being excluded by a social group are negatively associated with life satisfaction and happiness. These results indicate that social networks have both ‘bright side’ and ‘dark side’ effects on subjective wellbeing.