According to a recent paper by Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears, the number of Americans saying they have no one with whom they discuss important matters nearly tripled from 1985 to 2004. The study used the same questions from the 1984 survey to determine how social networks have changed over time. The core question was:

“From time to time, most people discuss important matters with other people. Looking back over the last six months—who are the people with whom you discussed matters important to you? Just tell me their first names or initials.”

The study found that the average number of people in our personal networks has decreased from 2.94 in 1985 to 2.08 in 2004. They also found that women’s social networks are more likely to involve non-kin: As women have moved from homemakers to the workforce, they have increased their number of confidants outside the family unit.

The authors offer several caveats for the extraordinary change in less than two decades: a change in the interpretation of the question, a different view of what is “important” in a post-9-11 world, and finally, actual differences in the way we interact.

Indeed, we do work more hours, commute longer distances, and communicate in new ways. All of these are likely contributors to the change. The Internet has made it possible to remain geographically dispersed while finding people with similar interests. Barry Wellman calls this concept “networked individualism.”

Communication via the Internet is also more public: Diaries once under lock and key are now blogs with hundreds of readers. A note once left on a work colleague’s desk is now an email with several other recipients copied. Open communication might make the idea of a confidant a less relevant concept. Asking someone in an Internet chat room for advice on how to deal with a parent with Alzheimer’s certainly qualifies as “discussing an important matter” even the person who responds remains anonymous.

Perhaps a recent paper from the Pew Internet & American Life Project puts it best:

“Instead of disappearing, people’s communities are transforming: The traditional human orientation to neighborhood- and village-based groups is moving towards communities that are oriented around geographically dispersed social networks. People communicate and maneuver in these networks rather than being bound up in one (solitary) community.”

Source: “Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades.” Miller McPherson Lynn Smith-Lovin, Matthew E. Brashears; American Sociological Review, 2006, VOL. 71 (June:353–375)

Post a Comment | Trackback URI