93instance, Switzerland shows an attitudinal profile more convergent with
individualization ideals, as individuals reveal a low level of child-
centredness and high openness to new family forms. These attitudes are
reflected in the importance given to some mechanisms and the under-
valuation of others: the low salience of kin and of present or past co-
resident members, the underrepresentation of children within networks
when compared to the other two countries, and the prevalence of long-
lasting ties (implying, among other things, that adult children are more
likely to be considered as significant family members than underage
children). By contrast, Lithuania reveals a more traditional attitudinal
profile with a strong focus on children and a low acceptance of new fam-
ily forms (same-gender couples, single-fatherhood, and voluntary child-
lessness). Accordingly, the Lithuanian networks are dominated by
kinship ties, mainly the nuclear family, and restricted to members of past
or present households. Therefore, Lithuanian networks are regulated by
more institutionalized principles linked to kinship and co-residence. If
we think of an attitudinal continuum, Portugal is located in the middle.
As the literature points out, Portugal is commonly characterized by a
double-bind or ambivalent behaviour, as the attitudinal patterns simul-
taneously combine continuity trends of a catholic and agrarian past tied
to a familialistic culture alongside individualized values stemming from
integration into the EU and the development of social policies promot-
ing work- family balance and gender equality. This articulation of old
and new norms concerning family and intimate life is reflected in the
composition of Portuguese networks, which is more diverse and inclu-
sive of both close and extended kin, relatives and friends, male and
female alters, and different acquaintances. Networks in Portugal seem to
result from a more complex negotiation of different principles of rela-
tional proximity.
As a last remark, not only do attitudes shape personal networks; the
composition of personal networks also shapes individuals’ attitudes.
Networks where family and kinship are dominant tend to promote more
traditional family attitudes and values, as network members such as par-
ents often exert normative pressure and social control. By contrast, diver-
sity in network composition and therefore, more diversified sources of
information, are likely to foster the development of more diverse atti-
A First Portrait of Personal Networks in a Comparative...