Families and Personal Networks An International Comparative Perspective

170

dense networks on various kinds of community, including schools and
businesses. When dyadic relationships are under the scrutiny of third
parties who are interconnected, the two partners trust each other more,
as they know that severe deviations from the rules will be made public
throughout the community. Parents in contact with each other and with
the school authorities are more able than disconnected parents to frame
their children’s behaviours and support them in their school work. The
higher the density, the more likely the individual is embedded in collec-
tive support and control. Density is the most commonly used indicator
of network closure and bonding social capital. Bridging social capital is
often measured in personal network research by the network centralisa-
tion, which is the proportion of chains of relationships in the network
captured by any individual (for instance, Widmer 2006 or Cornwell
2009). A network is said to be centralised if a small number of individuals
lie between all other members’ chains of relationships.^1 Therefore, the
likelihood that the Ego plays a critical role in her network is greater. Of
course, other measures of social capital exist, both bridging and bonding,
but the combination of size, density, and centralisation provides a good
approximation of the structure of social capital in personal networks.
When combining indicators of bridging and bonding social capital, we
face four distinct structures of relational resources, which are illustrated
in Table 6.1.
Each combination of bonding and bridging social capital has conse-
quences of its own (Table 6.1). Individuals with no social capital have the

Table 6.1 Four structures of social capital in personal networks

Bridging social capital

absent Bridging social capital present

Bonding social

capital absent

No social capital: low

density, small size, low

centralisation

Bridging social capital: low

density, medium to large size,

high centralisation, presence

of a rather large number of

distinct subgroups

Bonding social

capital present

Bonding social capital: high

density, medium to large

size, low centralisation

Comprehensive social capital:

high density in subgroups,

large size, high centrality of

focal individuals

E.D. Widmer et al.