바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN0023-3900
  • E-ISSN2733-9343

Changes in Korean Core Discussion Networks from 1996 to 2011: More Connected, Less Isolated

Korea Journal, (P)0023-3900; (E)2733-9343
2015, v.55 no.4, pp.136-165
https://doi.org/10.25024/kj.2015.55.4.136

  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

This study explores how the global trend toward networked individualism has been amplified in the Korean context by investigating changes in core discussion networks over the last 15 years. Secondary data from two national surveys are compared in regard to network structure and demographic variation. Koreans were more socially connected in 2011 than in 1996: the proportion of socially isolated people has decreased from 12.0% to 3.5%; and the mean size of core networks has increased from 2.7 to 3.1. This change is evident among the younger generations. The expansion of networks is attributed to the increased number of non-kin alters rather than kin ones, such as family members and relatives. Network density has increased despite the decreased proportion of kin. The effects of gender, age, and education on network attributes are subtle, inconsistent, or diminished.

keywords
Networked individualism social connectedness social isolation core discussion network communication network social network secondary analysis

Reference

1.

Albrecht, Terrance L., and Mara B. Adelman. 1984. “Social Support and Life Stress.”Human Communication Research 11.1: 3–32.

2.

Altman, Irwin, and Dalmas A. Taylor. 1973. Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. Oxford: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

3.

Binder, Jens F., Sam G.B. Roberts, and Alistair G. Sutcliffe. 2012. “Closeness, Loneliness, Support: Core Ties and Significant Ties in Personal Communities.”Social Networks 34.2: 206–214.

4.

Boase, Jeffrey, and Barry Wellman. 2006. “Personal Relationships: On and off the Internet.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships, edited by Anita L. Vangelisti and Daniel Perlman, 709–723. New York: Cambridge University Press.

5.

Boase, Jeffrey, and Ken’ichi Ikeda. 2012. “Core Discussion Networks in Japan and America.” Human Communication Research 38.1: 95–119.

6.

Bond, Robert M., Christopher J. Fariss, Jason J. Jones, Adam D. I. Kramer, Cameron Marlow, Jaime E. Settle, and James H. Fowler. 2012. “A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence and Political Mobilization.” Nature 489: 295–298

7.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. “The Forms of Capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by John G. Richardson, 241–258. New York: Greenwood.

8.

Brashears, Matthew E. 2011. “Small Networks and High Isolation? A Reexamination of American Discussion Networks.” Social Networks 33.4: 331–341.

9.

Burt, Ronald S. 1984. “Network Items and the General Social Survey.” Social Networks 6.4: 293–339.

10.

Cheong, Soo-Bok. 1996. “Hangugin-ui moim-gwa misijeok dongwon maengnak”(Korean Social Gatherings and Micro-Mobilization Contexts). Gyeongje-wa sahoe (Economy and Society) 29: 102–125.

11.

Christakis, Nicholas A., and James H. Fowler. 2009. Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. New York: Little, Brown & Co.

12.

Cialdini, Robert B., and Noah J. Goldstein. 2004. “Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity.” Annual Review of Psychology 55: 591–621.

13.

Cohen, Sheldon, and Thomas A. Wills. 1985. “Stress, Social support, and the Buffering Hypothesis.” Psychological Bulletin 98.2: 310–357.

14.

Coleman, James S. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” Ameri can Journal of Sociology 94: S95–S120.

15.

Fischer, Claude S. 1982. To Dwell among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

16.

Fischer, Claude S. 2009. “The 2004 GSS Finding of Shrunken Social Networks: An Artifact?” American Sociological Review 74.4: 657–669.

17.

Hall, Edward T. 1976. Beyond Culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.

18.

Hampton, Keith N., Lauren F. Sessions, and Eun Ja Her. 2011. “Core Networks, Social Isolation, and New Media: How Internet and Mobile Phone Use Is Related to Network Size and Diversity.” Information, Communication & Society 14.1: 130–155.

19.

Haythornthwaite, Caroline. 2002. “Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media.” Information Society 18.5: 385–401.

20.

Im, Yung-Ho, and Eun-mee Kim. 2011. “Sosyeol midieohyeong sotong bangsikgwa ingan gwangye-ui byeonhwa” (Communication via Social Media and Changes in Human Relationships). In Hanguk sahoe-ui digiteol midieo-wa munhwa (Digital Media and Culture in Korean Society), edited by Korean Society for Journalism & Communication Studies, 249–270. Seoul: Communication Books.

21.

Kim, Eun-mee. 2013. “Internet and the emergence of connected individuals.”Unpublished manuscript, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.

22.

Kim, Hyun-Joo. 1995. “Kkeunkkeunhan yeonjul-ui nara, hanguk” (Korea, Country of Strong Yeonjul Ties). In Jeong, chemyeon, yeonjul, geurigo hangugin-ui ingan gwangye (Korean Interpersonal Relationships: Jeong, Chemyeon, and Yeonjul), edited by Lim Tae-Seop, 193–210. Seoul: Hannarae.

23.

Kim, Joo Hee. 2013. “Hanguk nongchon jumin-ui sahoejeok gwangye-ui byeonhwa” (Changes of Social Relationships in a Rice-cultivating Village in Korea:Focusing on the Farming Successor Cohort Born in the 1950s). Hanguk munhwa illyuhak (Korean Cultural Anthropology) 46.2: 93–130.

24.

Kim, Sang-Wook. 2011. Korean General Social Survey (KGSS), 2011. Seoul: Survey Research Center, Sungkyunkwan University. Distributed by Seoul: Korea Social Science Data Archive.

25.

Kim, Sun-Up. 1992. “Hanguk sahoe yeonjulmang-ui gujojeok teukseong” (An Empirical Study of Personal Networks). Hanguk sahoehak (Korean Journal of Sociology) 26: 1–33.

26.

Kwon, Jung-Hye, Sula Yook, Sungbum Woo, and Hyun Cho. 2013. “Opeurain-gwa ollain daein gwangye-ga sahoe jabon hyungseong-gwa jugwanjeok annyeonggam-e michineun yeonghyang” (Effects of Offline and Online Interpersonal Relationships on Social Capital and Subjective Well-Bring). Journal of the Cyber Communication Academic Society 30.2: 5–32.

27.

Licoppe, Christian, and Zbigniew Smoreda. 2006. “Rhythms and Ties: Towards a Pragmatics of Technologically-Mediated Sociability.” In Computers, Phones, and the Internet: Domesticating Information Technology, edited by Robert Kraut, Malcolm Brynin, and Sara Kiesler, 296–324. New York: Oxford University Press.

28.

Lim, Hyun-Chin. 1996. Surveys on Consciousness and Values in Transitional Society (SCV), 1996. Seoul: Institute for Social Development and Policy Research, Seoul National University. Distributed by Seoul: Korea Social Science Data Archive.

29.

Lin, Nan. 1999. “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital.” Connections 22.1:28–51.

30.

Livingstone, Sonia. 2009. “On the mediation of everything: ICA presidential address 2008.” Journal of Communication 59.1: 1–18.

31.

Markus, Hazel R., and Shinobu Kitayama. 1991. “Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation.” Psychological Review 98.2:224–253.

32.

Marsden, Peter V. 1987. “Core Discussion Networks of Americans.” American Sociological Review 52.1: 122–131.

33.

Marsden, Peter V., and Noah E. Friedkin. 1993. “Network Studies of Social Influence.”Sociological Methods & Research 22.1: 127–151

34.

Mason, Karen O., William M. Mason, H. H. Winsborough, and W. Kenneth Poole. 1973. “Some Methodological Issues in Cohort Analysis of Archival Data.” American Sociological Review 38.2: 242–258.

35.

Poole. 1973. “Some Methodological Issues in Cohort Analysis of Archival Data.” American Sociological Review 38.2: 242–258.

36.

McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears. 2006. “Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades.” American Sociological Review 71.3: 353–375.

37.

Na, Eun-Yeong, and Yuri Cha. 2010. “Hangugin-ui gachigwan byeonhwa chui:1979-nyeon, 1998-nyeon, mit 2010-nyeon-ui josa gyeolgwa bigyo” (Trends of Value Changes in Korea: Based on 1979, 1998, and 2010 Survey Data). Hanguk simnihakhoeji: sahoe mit seonggyeok (Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology) 24.4: 63–93.

38.

Paik, Anthony, and Kenneth Sanchagrin. 2013. “Social Isolation in America: An Artifact.” American Sociological Review 78.3: 339–360.

39.

Palantiri 2020. 2008. Uri-neun maikeuro sosaieoti-ro ganda (We Are Heading towards a Micro Society). Seoul: Woongjin Wings.

40.

Shor, Eran, David J. Roelfs, and Tamar Yogev. 2013. “The Strength of Family Ties:A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Self-Reported Social Support and Mortality.” Social Networks 35.4: 626–638.

41.

Small, Mario L. 2013. “Weak Ties and the Core Discussion Network: Why People Regularly Discuss Important Matters with Unimportant Alters.” Social Networks 35.3: 470–483.

42.

Smith, Jeffrey A., Miller McPherson, and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 2014. “Social Distance in the United States: Sex, Race, Religion, Age, and Education Homophily among Confidants, 1985 to 2004.” American Sociological Review 79.3: 432–456.

43.

Triandis, Harry C. 1995. Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

44.

Van Dijk, Jan A. G. M. 1999. The Network Society: Social Aspects of the New Media. London: Sage.

45.

Walther, Joseph B. 2011. “Theories of Computer-Mediated Communication and Interpersonal Relations.” In The Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, edited by Mark L. Knapp and John A. Daly, 443–479. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

46.

Wang, Hua, and Barry Wellman. 2010. “Social Connectivity in America: Changes in Adult Friendship Network Size from 2002 to 2007.” American Behavioral Scientist 53.8: 1148–1169.

47.

Wellman, Barry. 1992. “Which Types of Ties and Networks Provide What Kinds of Social Support?” Advances in Group Processes 9: 207–235.

48.

Wellman, Barry. 2001. “Physical Place and Cyberspace: The Rise of Personalized Networking.”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 25.2: 227–252.

49.

Wellman, Barry. 2002. “Little Boxes, Glocalization, and Networked Individualism.” In Digital Cities II: Computational and Sociological Approaches, edited by Makoto Tanabe, Peter van den Besselaar, and Toru Ishida, 10–25. Berlin: Springer.

50.

Wellman, Barry, and Scot Wortley. 1990. “Different Strokes from Different Folks:Community Ties and Social Support.” American Journal of Sociology 96.3:558–588.

51.

Wittel, Andreas. 2001. “Toward a Network Sociality.” Theory, Culture & Society 18.6: 51–76.

52.

Yee, Jaeyeol. 2000. “The Social Networks of Koreans.” Korea Journal 40.1: 325–352.

53.

Yi, Jonghan. 1992. “Gongdongche uisik-e gwanhan gaeinjuui-jipdanjuui gwanjeom-eseoui bigyo munhwajeok bunseok” (A Cross-Cultural Analysis of the Sense of Community from Individualist-Collectivist Perspectives). Hanguk simni hakhoeji: sahoe (Korean Journal of Social Psychology) 6.2: 76–93.

54.

Yi, Jonghan. 2000. “Hangugin-ui daein gwangye-ui simni sahoejeok teukseong:jipdanjuuijeok seonghyang-gwa gaeinjuuijeok seonghyang-euroui byeonhwa”(Psycho-Social Characteristics of Korean Adults: Collectivist and Moving toward Individualist). Hanguk simni hakhoeji: sahoe munje (Korean Journal of Psychology and Social Issues) 6.3: 201–219.

55.

Zhu, Xiumei, Sang Eun Woo, Caitlin Porter, and Michael Brzezinski. 2013. “Pathways to Happiness: From Personality to Social Networks and Perceived Support.”Social Networks 35.3: 382–393.

56.

Zimet, Gregory D., Nancy W. Dahlem, Sara G. Zimet, and Gordon K. Farley. 1998. “The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support.” Journal of Personality Assessment 52.1: 30–41.

Korea Journal