How to make head or tail of bridging and bonding? Adressing the methodological ambiguity
[Wie ist ‘Briding vs. Bonding’ sozialer Netzwerke zu verstehen? Das Problem der methodischen Zweideutigkeit]
A distinction has recently been proposed between bridging (or encompassing) and bonding (or inward-looking) social networks. However, existing theoretical contributions remain vague as to the fundamental meaning of both concepts. As a consequence, two distinct interpretations have evolved alongside each other. In the present paper, we employ data on voluntary association membership in Flanders to empirically illustrate that both approaches can lead to substantially different outcomes and therefore appear to tap into different dimensions of bridging versus bonding. These findings underline the problematic nature of the current conceptual ambiguity. We conclude that should the bridging-bonding distinction add meaningfully to our understanding of the external effects of social networks, it is essential to resolve the conceptual and methodological imprecision.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Reichpietschufer 50, 10785 Berlin|
Phone: +49 (0)30 25491-402
Fax: +49 (0)30 25491-400
Web page: http://www.wzb.eu/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Quibria, M.G., 2003. "The Puzzle of Social Capital: A Critical Review," MPRA Paper 2640, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2003.
- Bowen, Harry P. & Moesen, W., 2005. "Benchmarking the competitiveness of nations: non-uniform weighting and non-economic dimensions," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2005-2, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.