Heterophily

Last updated

Heterophily, or love of the different, is the tendency of individuals to collect in diverse groups; it is the opposite of homophily. This phenomenon can be seen in relationships between individuals. As a result, it can be analyzed in the workplace to create a more efficient and innovative workplace. It has also become an area of social network analysis.

Contents

Origin and definition of the term

Most of the early work in heterophily was done in the 1960s by Everett Rogers in his book Diffusion Of Innovations . According to Rogers, "Heterophily, the mirror opposite of homophily, is defined as the degree to which pairs of individuals who interact are different in certain attributes". [1] This is in contrast to homophily, the likelihood that individuals are to surround themselves with those they share similarities with. [1] An example of heterophily would be to individuals from different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds becoming friends. Through his work Rogers showed that heterophilous networks were better able to spread innovations. Later, scholars such as Paul Burton have drawn connections between modern social network analysis as practiced by Mark Granovetter in his theory of weak ties and the work of Georg Simmel. Burton found that Simmel's notion of "the stranger" is equivalent to Granovetter's weak tie in that both can bridge homophilous networks, turning them into one larger heterophilous network.

In social and intimate relationships

Heterophily is usually not a term found often by itself. Rather it is often used in conjunction with other similar terms that define attraction. Heterophily is often discussed with its opposite, homophily when analyzing how relationships form between people. Heterophily also may be mentioned in areas such as homogamy, exogamy, and endogamy.

To fully understand heterophily, it is important to understand the meaning and importance of homophily. The theory of homophily states that "similarity breeds connection." [2] Homophily has two specific types, status homophily and value homophily. Status homophily are ascribed statuses such as race, gender, and age. [2] Value homophily refers to shared beliefs and practices between individuals. [2] Studies of homophily have linked attraction between individuals based on similarly shared demographics. These may include, but are not limited to: race, ethnicity, gender, and socio-economic status. In fact, according to The logic of social bias: The structural demography of heterophily by Ray Reagans, the first component is the intrinsic level of interpersonal attraction due to homophily. [3] Individuals are more likely to form social groups based upon what they have on common. This creates strong ties within the group. Mark Granovetter defined the strength of a tie as a "combination of the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy, and the reciprocal services which characterize the tie". [4] However, Granovetter's article suggested that weak ties are also instrumental in building social networks. He believed that weak ties could be possibly more effective than strong ties in reaching individuals. [4] Findings like this have been referenced when discussing heterophily.

The effect and occurrence of heterophily is also analyzed in intimate relationships. In Dangerous Liaisons? Dating and Drinking Diffusion in Adolescent Peer Networks, Derek Kreager and Dana Haynie mention the effects of heteroplhily on romantic relationships. They see the removal of the barrier of gender as a departure from the homophily of peer friendships. [5] According to Kreager and Haynie "exposure to new behaviors and social contexts associated with a dating partner may also correspond to higher levels of influence from that partner." [5] The terms homogamy, endogamy, and exogamy are often used when discussing intimate relationships in a sociological context. Homogamy refers to the tendency of individuals to marry others that share similarities with each other, while endogamy is the practice of marrying within a specific group. The relation between these terms and homophily is the tendency to be attracted to what is similar. Homogamy and endogamy may be a result of cultural practices or personal preference. Endogamy's antithesis, exogamy, is marriage only outside of a particular group.

In the working environment

The concept of heterophily has been mentioned pertaining to working environments and the relationships within them. Heterophily is especially prevalent when discussing the diffusion of innovations theory. Diffusion of Innovations was the book written by Everett Rogers where he first termed heterophily. The diffusion of innovation theory itself is used to explain how new or innovative ideas are spread throughout a system composed of individuals. Rogers saw heterophily between individuals as "one of the most distinctive problems in the communication". This is because he believed homophily to be a more beneficial agent in communication. The general reasoning for this was that people who have more in common with each other are able to communicate more comfortably with each other. Still, Rogers believed that heterophily has such an impact on the diffusion of innovation theory that he stated in his book that "the very nature of diffusion demands that at least some degree of heterophily be present between the two participants". [6] Heterophily is also an active part of the diffusion of information process. As a result, the concept of heterophily has been studied to try to improve relationships between individuals in the workplace.

See also

Related Research Articles

Exogamy is the social norm of mating or marrying outside one's social group. The group defines the scope and extent of exogamy, and the rules and enforcement mechanisms that ensure its continuity. One form of exogamy is dual exogamy, in which two groups continually intermarry with each other.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Urban sociology</span> Sociological study of life and human interaction in metropolitan areas

Urban sociology is the sociological study of cities and urban life. One of the field’s oldest sub-disciplines, urban sociology studies and examines the social, historical, political, cultural, economic, and environmental forces that have shaped urban environments. Like most areas of sociology, urban sociologists use statistical analysis, observation, archival research, U.S. census data, social theory, interviews, and other methods to study a range of topics, including poverty, racial residential segregation, economic development, migration and demographic trends, gentrification, homelessness, blight and crime, urban decline, and neighborhood changes and revitalization. Urban sociological analysis provides critical insights that shape and guide urban planning and policy-making.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social network analysis</span> Analysis of social structures using network and graph theory

Social network analysis (SNA) is the process of investigating social structures through the use of networks and graph theory. It characterizes networked structures in terms of nodes and the ties, edges, or links that connect them. Examples of social structures commonly visualized through social network analysis include social media networks, meme spread, information circulation, friendship and acquaintance networks, peer learner networks, business networks, knowledge networks, difficult working relationships, collaboration graphs, kinship, disease transmission, and sexual relationships. These networks are often visualized through sociograms in which nodes are represented as points and ties are represented as lines. These visualizations provide a means of qualitatively assessing networks by varying the visual representation of their nodes and edges to reflect attributes of interest.

Mark Sanford Granovetter is an American sociologist and professor at Stanford University. He is best known for his work in social network theory and in economic sociology, particularly his theory on the spread of information in social networks known as The Strength of Weak Ties (1973). In 2014 Granovetter was named a Citation Laureate by Thomson Reuters and added to that organization’s list of predicted Nobel Prize winners in economics. Data from the Web of Science show that Granovetter has written both the first and third most cited sociology articles.

Everett M. "Ev" Rogers was an American communication theorist and sociologist, who originated the diffusion of innovations theory and introduced the term early adopter. He was distinguished professor emeritus in the department of communication and journalism at the University of New Mexico.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diffusion of innovations</span> Theory on how and why new ideas spread

Diffusion of innovations is a theory that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread. The theory was popularized by Everett Rogers in his book Diffusion of Innovations, first published in 1962. Rogers argues that diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated over time among the participants in a social system. The origins of the diffusion of innovations theory are varied and span multiple disciplines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Homophily</span> Process by which people befriend similar people

Homophily is a concept in sociology describing the tendency of individuals to associate and bond with similar others, as in the proverb "birds of a feather flock together". The presence of homophily has been discovered in a vast array of network studies: over 100 studies have observed homophily in some form or another, and they establish that similarity is associated with connection. The categories on which homophily occurs include age, gender, class, and organizational role.

In the study of complex networks, assortative mixing, or assortativity, is a bias in favor of connections between network nodes with similar characteristics. In the specific case of social networks, assortative mixing is also known as homophily. The rarer disassortative mixing is a bias in favor of connections between dissimilar nodes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interpersonal ties</span>

In social network analysis and mathematical sociology, interpersonal ties are defined as information-carrying connections between people. Interpersonal ties, generally, come in three varieties: strong, weak or absent. Weak social ties, it is argued, are responsible for the majority of the embeddedness and structure of social networks in society as well as the transmission of information through these networks. Specifically, more novel information flows to individuals through weak rather than strong ties. Because our close friends tend to move in the same circles that we do, the information they receive overlaps considerably with what we already know. Acquaintances, by contrast, know people that we do not, and thus receive more novel information.

In social dynamics, critical mass is a sufficient number of adopters of a new idea, technology or innovation in a social system so that the rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining and creates further growth. The point at which critical mass is achieved is sometimes referred to as a threshold within the threshold model of statistical modeling.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Triadic closure</span>

Triadic closure is a concept in social network theory, first suggested by German sociologist Georg Simmel in his 1908 book Soziologie [Sociology: Investigations on the Forms of Sociation]. Triadic closure is the property among three nodes A, B, and C, that if the connections A-B and A-C exist, there is a tendency for the new connection B-C to be formed. Triadic closure can be used to understand and predict the growth of networks, although it is only one of many mechanisms by which new connections are formed in complex networks.

Complex contagion is the phenomenon in social networks in which multiple sources of exposure to an innovation are required before an individual adopts the change of behavior. It differs from simple contagion in that unlike a disease, it may not be possible for the innovation to spread after only one incident of contact with an infected neighbor. The spread of complex contagion across a network of people may depend on many social and economic factors; for instance, how many of one's friends adopt the new idea as well as how many of them cannot influence the individual, as well as their own disposition in embracing change.

Filter theory is a sociological theory concerning dating and mate selection. It proposes that social structure limits the number of eligible candidates for a mate. Most often, this takes place due to homogamy, as people seek to date and marry only those similar to them. Homogamy is the idea of marriage between spouses who share similar characteristics, where heterogamy denotes marriage between spouses of different characteristics. The idea of "opposites attract” is heterogamous, as well as the idea that one spouse has complementing, not similar characteristics to the other.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social network</span> Social structure made up of a set of social actors

A social network is a social structure made up of a set of social actors, sets of dyadic ties, and other social interactions between actors. The social network perspective provides a set of methods for analyzing the structure of whole social entities as well as a variety of theories explaining the patterns observed in these structures. The study of these structures uses social network analysis to identify local and global patterns, locate influential entities, and examine network dynamics.

Homogamy is marriage between individuals who are, in some culturally important way, similar to each other. It is a form of assortative mating. The union may be based on socioeconomic status, class, gender, caste, ethnicity, or religion, or age in the case of the so-called age homogamy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Simmelian tie</span>

A simmelian tie is a type of an interpersonal tie, a concept used in the social network analysis. For a simmelian tie to exist, there must be three or more of reciprocal strong ties in a group. A simmelian tie is seen as an even stronger tie than a regular strong tie.

The sociological theory of diffusion is the study of the diffusion of innovations throughout social groups and organizations. The topic has seen rapid growth since the 1990s, reflecting curiosity about the process of social change and "fueled by interest in institutional arguments and in network and dynamic analysis." The theory uses a case study of the growth of business computing to explain different mechanisms of diffusion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intermingling</span>

Intermingling, or heterophily, from a sociological perspective includes the various forms of interactions between individuals that go against a particular society's cultural norms. These relationships stem from weak or absent ties, which are contrary to strong ties and constitute of networks between individuals who know little or nothing about one another. Examples of intermingling can include networking, work-place romance, or cross-cultural dating.

In the field of sociolinguistics, social network describes the structure of a particular speech community. Social networks are composed of a "web of ties" between individuals, and the structure of a network will vary depending on the types of connections it is composed of. Social network theory posits that social networks, and the interactions between members within the networks, are a driving force behind language change.

Structural holes is a concept from social network research, originally developed by Ronald Stuart Burt. A structural hole is understood as a gap between two individuals who have complementary sources to information. The study of structural holes spans the fields of sociology, economics, and computer science. Burt introduced this concept in an attempt to explain the origin of differences in social capital. Burt’s theory suggests that individuals hold certain positional advantages/disadvantages from how they are embedded in neighborhoods or other social structures.

References

Citations

  1. 1 2 Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
  2. 1 2 3 McPherson, Miller; Smith-Lovin, Lynn; Cook, James M. (August 2001). "Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks". Annual Review of Sociology. 27 (1): 415–444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415.
  3. Reagans, Ray (1998). The logic of social bias: The structural demography of homophily. Ann Arbor. ISBN   978-0-599-19307-9.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  4. 1 2 Granovetter, Mark S. (May 1973). "The Strength of Weak Ties". American Journal of Sociology. 78 (6): 1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469. S2CID   59578641.
  5. 1 2 Kreager, D. A.; Haynie, D. L. (28 September 2011). "Dangerous Liaisons? Dating and Drinking Diffusion in Adolescent Peer Networks". American Sociological Review. 76 (5): 737–763. doi:10.1177/0003122411416934. PMC   4198171 . PMID   25328162.
  6. Rogers, Everett M. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3 ed.). New York u.a.: Free Pr. u.a. ISBN   0029266505.

Bibliography