How (not) to measure social support networks: The name generator vs. The role relation approach

Metodoloski Zvezki

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 191-207

  Hlebec, Valentina ^a   Kogovšek, Tina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867684348     PISSN: 18540023     EISSN: 18540031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Andrews, F.M., Morgan, J.N., Sonquist, J.A., and Klem, L. (1973): Multiple Classifications Analysis. Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor.
2. Antonucci, T.C. (1986): Measuring social support networks: Hierarchical mapping technique. Generations, 10, 10-12.
3. Bernard, R.H., Killworth, P.D., and Sailer, L. (1982): Informant accuracy in social network data: An experimental attempt to predict actual communication from recall data. Social Science Research, 11, 30-66.
4. Burt, R.S. (1984): Network items and the general social survey. Social Networks, 6, 293-339.
5. Ferligoj, A. and Hlebec, V. (1999): Evaluation of social network neasurement instruments. Social Networks, 21, 111-130.
6. Hlebec, V. and Kogovšek, T. (2005): Hypothetical versus actual support providers in comparative network research. Metodološki Zvezki, 2, 73-93.
7. Hlebec, V., Mrzel, M., and Kogovšek, T. (2009): Social support network and received support at stessful events. Metodološki Zvezki, 6, 155-171.
8. Holland, P.W. and Leinhardt, S. (1973): The Structural implications of measurement error in sociometry. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 3, 85- 111.
9. Kogovšek, T., Ferligoj, A., Coenders, G., and Saris, W.E. (2002): Estimating the reliability and validity of personal support measures: Full information ML estimation with planned incomplete data. Social Networks, 24, 1-20.
10. Kogovšek, T. and Ferligoj, A. (2004): The quality of measurement of personal support subnetworks. Quality & Quantity, 38, 517-532.
11. Kogovšek, T. and Hlebec, V. (2008): Measuring ego-centered social networks: Do cheaper methods with respondent burden provide good estimates of network composition? Metodološki Zvezki, 5, 127-143.
12. Kogovšek, T. and Hlebec, V. (2009): Stability of typologies produced on the basis of repeated measurement with the role relationship and the name generator approach. Metodološki Zvezki, 6, 85-97.
13. Lozar Manfreda, K., Vehovar, V., and Hlebec, V. (2004): Collecting ego- centred network data via the Web. Metodološki Zvezki, 1, 295-321.
14. McCallister, L. and Fisher, C.S. (1983): A procedure for surveying personal networks. In Burt, R.S. and Minor, M.J. (Eds.): Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction, 75-88. Beverly Hills: Sage.
15. van der Poel, M. (1993) Personal Networks: A Rational Choice Explanation of Their Size and Composition. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
16. van Groenou, M.B., van Sonderen, E., and Ormel, J. (1990): Test-retest reliability of personal network delineation. In Knipscheer, C.P.M., Antonucci, T.C. (Eds.): Network Research: Substantive Issues and Methodological Questions, 121-136. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
17. van Sonderen, E., Ormel, J., Brilman, E., and van Linden van der Heuvell, C. (1990): Personal network delineation: A comparison of the exchange, affective and role-relation approach. In Knipscheer, C.P.M. and Antonucci, T.C. (Eds.): Network Research: Substantive Issues and Methodological Questions, 101-120. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
18. Vehovar, V., Lozar Manfreda, K., Koren, G., and Hlebec, V. (2008): Measuring ego-centered social networks on the Web: Questionnaire design issues. Social Networks, 30, 213-222.