Papers
Untangling the Roots of Tolerance: How Networks, Voluntary Associations, and Personal Attributes Shape Attitudes toward Ethnic Minorities and Immigrants
Côté, Rochelle R. and Bonnie H. Erickson. 2009. American Behavioral Scientist 52(12): 1664-1689.
Past research suggests that tolerance flows from personal characteristics (especially education), from diversified networks, and from participation in voluntary associations. Earlier work has never included all of these in the same study, so we have not been able to explore alternative theoretical accounts of how these possible causes of tolerance connect to each other and to tolerance. For example, does education lead to tolerance because education opens minds, or because more educated people develop more diversified networks and are more active in associations? Do association members have more tolerance because association activities
meet the conditions of the "contact hypothesis," or because members are well educated, or because association activity widens one's networks? Further, 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 have different effects on tolerance. Exploring such 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.
LikeIt’s Not Who You Know, It’s How You Know Them: Who Exchanges What With Whom?
Plickert, Gabriele, Rochelle R. Côté and Barry Wellman. 2007. Social Networks, 29(3): 405-429.
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 people's 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.
Add Comment