Summary Titkova V.V. (Сетевой анализ факторов социального признания и исключения в среде подростков)

National Research UniversityHigher School of EconomicsAs a manuscriptVera V. TitkovaSOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTINGPOPULARITY AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ADOLESCENTENVIRONMENTThesis Summary for the purpose of obtaining PhD in Sociology HSEAcademic Supervisor:PhD in biologyDaniel A. AlexandrovMoscow, 20181.

Statement of research problemThe current study is dedicated to the connection between social exclusion,behaviours and attitudes of adolescents both on individual and group level.Popularity and social exclusion are defined through the individual’s position in thestructure of friendships and negative relationships in the peer group.

Adolescentscreate a certain social group structure, when they initiate or break their connections.The actions of the individuals are determined by their embeddedness in the socialstructure. Thus, these actions are conducted with accordance to group norms, valuesand the social status of the individual in the group.A substantial part of research papers in the fields of educational sociology aswell as social psychology focus on describing the significant connection betweenindividual characteristics and social status of adolescents. The results of thesestudies demonstrate how popularity and social exclusion are determined byindividual characteristics of the adolescent, such as gender, age, ethnic status,various social and psychological attitudes, as well as certain behaviours, forexample, bullying and risky behaviours.Other studies specify how various individual characteristics, attitudes orbehaviours influence social status in the groups with various characteristics: indifferent types of educational institutions, in classes of different ethnic compositionetc.

However, comparison between different studies demonstrates that there is nosolid understanding of which of the discovered connections remain stable regardlessof outer conditions, as well as which of the connections change together with thesocial context.The current study uses network analysis of positive and negative relationshipsin various groups of adolescents. The following approach provides a betterunderstanding of significance of individual factors and general group characteristicsfor popularity and social exclusion of adolescents.The research problem of the current study is relevant due to various reasons.First of all, there is a definite necessity to expand the current understanding of socialstructure of small adolescent groups, as well as the processes that lead to popularity2and social exclusion of these groups’ members.

An adolescent’s popularity derivesfrom the position they have in the social group. Popularity is studied throughhierarchical relationships, approval, social dominance, support, compliance withgroup norms and values. The present variety in the definition of popularity, as wellas the challenges arising while comparing the results of existing empirical studiesdedicated to the matter, makes the new studies of social mechanisms determiningthe social structure formation relevant.Secondly, expanding the knowledge on mechanisms of social exclusionbecomes a relevant issue, when the student who is being excluded, is the one whoclassmates refuse to communicate with.

The recent years have seen the appearanceof the research papers defining social exclusion as participation in negativerelationships (enmity, objection) rather than lack of friendships. In this case socialexclusion is no longer defined as one’s position on the scale from “unpopular topopular”. This approach creates a new dimension of exclusion, namely “nonexcluded to excluded”.Thirdly, the relevance of the current study is supported by applying the newesttechniques of social network analysis. This provides more detailed, comprehensiveand deep understanding of how various types of social structures are formed.Moreover, this approach allows to monitor the dynamics of their development.Sociometry has already been used by J. L. Moreno in 1930s.

Its first appearance inRussia is connected to Y.L. Kolominsky, who used it in his research in 1970s. Backthen the researchers’ conclusions were based on the connection between theindividual characteristics of the child with the number of social links they have.Since then the method has undergone some significant changes leading to itsimprovement. The newest techniques of social network analysis allow to performcomplex analysis of social relations within the group; simultaneously analyzeseveral types of relationships that exist between the students to test the hypothesissuggesting the existence of complex network structures; analyze the coevolution ofsocial relationships and behaviour to study the processes of social selection andsocial influence.32.

Aim and objectives of the studyThe aim of this study is to examine how popularity and social exclusion areconnected to attitudes and behaviour of students, as well as to the characteristics ofeducational environment in the class. Popularity and social exclusion define thestudent’s position in the social structure of the school class. The current studyexamines two different types of popularity: sociometric popularity (number offriends) and perceived popularity (attitudes about who is popular in class).The aim is perceived through the following objectives:1. Analysis of factors of sociometric and perceived popularity:− how do teenagers construct the term “popularity” in the Russian culturalcontext, and what criteria of popularity do they name− analysis of how perceived popularity is connected to academic success andbehaviour of teenagers;− analysis of how sociometric popularity is connected to academic success andbullying in different educational environments;− analysis of relationship between sociometric popularity and perceivedpopularity with individual characteristic and negative ties being controlled.2.

Analysis of coevolution of friendship networks’ structure and adolescents’behaviours− analysis of coevolution of friendship networks’ structure and riskybehaviours, such as smoking and alcohol consumption.− analysis of coevolution of friendship networks and academic attitudes.3. Analysis of social exclusion factors:− analysis of connection between negative networks and individualcharacteristics of students;− analysis of connection between the structure of negative networks andfriendship networks.The object of the current study is adolescents, 15 to 18 years of age, comingfrom schools and vocational schools of Saint Petersburg and Moscow District4(object of study). The study focuses on examining the social status(popularity/exclusion) of adolescents in the structure of negative networks andfriendship networks in school classes.

The study examines two main types ofpopularity: sociometric popularity and perceived popularity. Sociometric popularityis the number of indegree friendship nominations received from classmates.Prceived popularity is the number of indegree ties, received as an answer to thequestion “who is popular in class”? Social exclusion is the number of negativenominations extracted from the question “whom do you communicate least withfrom your class?”3. BackgroundModern studies in the framework of relational sociology describe socialrelations based on individual’s embeddedness in social networks. According to thisapproach, the individual is living in the network of social relations, and is activelyusing the opportunities provided by the network to reach their goals and aims.

Thenetwork structure, in its turn, is creating favourable conditions or restrictions for theactions of an individual [Грановеттер, 2009].The studies on the matter demonstrate that adolescents adopt certain behavioursto acquire he high status in the group and avoid social exclusion. Most works provethat academic success is positively related to sociometric popularity, but has anegative relation with perceived popularity [Schwartz, 2006; Gorman, Kim,Schimmelbusch, 2002; LaFontana, Cillessen, 2002]. The fact that students with highsociometric popularity demonstrate outstanding academic achievements is notdoubted [de Bruyn, Cillessen, 2006; Rodkin et al., 2000], but it does not mean, thatacademic success necessarily leads to being popular [LaFontana, Cillessen, 2002;Gorman, Kim, Schimmelbusch, 2002].Ethnic status (migration history) does definitely have an effect on friendshipsand negative relations among adolescents.

Ethnic segregation is often perceived asan obstacle that interrupts with integration of migrant children of various generations[Plenty, Jonsson, 2016]. The grounds for segregation vary between countries: in5American society the main determinant is racial status, in England ethnic minorityis defined through having the experience of transborder migration (common«minority» experience) [Alba, Holdaway, 2013, pp.

123-124], in the countries ofWestern Europe the division is based on religious affiliation [Alba, 2005]. Pupilsrefuse to share a desk with their classmates originating from a religious minority; ifteenagers have just arrived to the country of residence, they can easily face the riskof social isolation from the ethnic majority. [Plenty, Jonsson, 2016]. Cultural andhistorical peculiarities of the country together with urban housing segregation andethnic composition of classes at school affect relationships within peer groups invarious ways [Smith, van Tubergen, Maas et al, 2016; Alba, Holdaway, 2013 (book);Alba, Silberman, 2009; Kruse, 2017; Kruse, Smith, van Tubergen et al, 2016].Theconnectionbetweenpopularity,socialexclusionandbullying/victimization of adolescents has been studied in various research papers[Vaillancourt, Hymel, 2006; Cillessen, Mayeux, 2004; Puckett et al., 2008; Smith etal., 2010].