Skip to main content
Log in

Life space and social networks as political contexts

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on data collected in the course of the September and November 1980 waves of the National Election Studies, this contextual analysis of interpersonal relations in social networks presents two major findings: First, the neighborhood as a geographical unit does not appear to be a perceptually salient environment for political behavior; and second,particular neighbors, individually linked to a voter, appear to constitute a social network that has an independent impact on partisan affect for the political parties and their candidates as well as on stability or change in vote preferences as the electoral season goes forward. Thus, although the neighborhood appears to be of minor importance as a politicalenvironment, social relations among particular neighbors result in an interpersonalcontext that has an impact on political behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berelson, B. F., Lazarsfeld, P. F., and McPhee, W. N. (1954).Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Gurin, G., and Miller, W. E. (1954).The Voter Decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crenson, M. A. (1978). Social networks and political processes in urban neighborhoods.American Journal of Political Science 22:578–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H. (1969). On units and levels of analysis. In H. Eulau,Micro-Macro Political Analysis: Accents of Inquiry, pp. 1–19. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H. (1980). The Columbia studies of personal influence: social network analysis.Social Science History 4:207–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H. (1984). The redwood network project: small-scale research at the local level.ICPSR Bulletin 4(2):1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H., and Siegel, J. W. (1980). A post-facto experiment in contextual analysis: of day- and night-dwellers.Experimental Study of Politics 7:1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H., and Siegel, J. W. (1981). Social network analysis and political behavior: a feasibility study.Western Political Quarterly 34:499–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957).A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finifter, A. W. (1974). The friendship group as a protective environment for political deviants.American Political Science Review 68:607–625.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitton, M. (1973). Neighborhood and voting: a sociometric examination.British Journal of Political Science 3:445–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foladare, I. S. (1968). The effect of neighborhood on voting behavior.Political Science Quarterly 83:516–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958).The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. (1961).Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R. R. (1979). Political participation in the neighborhood social context.American Journal of Political Science 23:579–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R. R. (1980). Variable responses to neighborhood social contexts: assimilation, conflict, and tipping points.Political Behavior 2:231–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R. R. (1983a). The social context of ethnic politics.American Politics Quarterly 11:91–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R. R. (1983b). The social context of political change: durability, volatility, and social influence.American Political Science Review 77:929–944.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, R. R. (1984). Political loyalties and social class ties: the mechanisms of contextual influence.American Journal of Political Science 28:399–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joreskog, K. G., and Sorbom, D. (1981).Lisrel V: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships in Maximum Likelihood and Least Square Methods. Uppsala, Sweden: University of Uppsala, Department of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, E., and Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955).Personal Influence, Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O., Jr. (1966).The Responsible Electorate: Rationality in Presidential Voting, 1936–1960. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke, D., and Kuklinski, J. H. (1982).Network Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1948). General framework: person, personality, group, culture. In H. D. Lasswell (ed.),The Analysis of Political Behavior, pp. 195–234. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laumann, E. O. (1973).Bonds of Pluralism. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., and Gaudet, H. (1948).The People's Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951).Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClosky, H., and Dahlgren, H. E. (1959). Primary group influence and party loyalty.American Political Science Review 53:757–775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G. H. (1934).Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. E. (1956). One-party politics and the voter.American Political Science Review 50:707–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R., and Ross, L. (1980).Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1970).Structuralism. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1966). Political attitudes and the local community.American Political Science Review 60:640–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, D. R., and Meyer, M. W. (1969). The social context of political partisanship. In M. Dogan and S. Rokkan (eds.),Quantitative Ecological Analysis in the Social Sciences, pp. 217–232. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheingold, C. A. (1973). Social networks and voting: the resurrection of a research agenda.American Sociological Review 39:712–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shils, E. A. (1951). The study of the primary group. In D. Lerner and H. D. Lasswell (eds.),The Policy Sciences, pp. 44–69. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprague, J. (1982). Is there a micro theory consistent with contextual analysis? In E. Ostrom (ed.),Strategies of Political Inquiry, pp. 99–121. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherford, M. S. (1982). Interpersonal networks and political behavior.American Journal of Political Science 26:117–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G. C. (1976). Community structure and voting in the south.Public Opinion Quarterly 40:201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G. C. (1977). Contextual models of electoral behavior: the southern Wallace vote.American Political Science Review 71:497–508.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This article is being published simultaneously as Chapter 12 in Heinz Eulau,Politics, Self and Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress). Copyright 1986 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eulau, H., Rothenberg, L. Life space and social networks as political contexts. Polit Behav 8, 130–157 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987180

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987180

Keywords

Navigation