4 Identifying subgroups: the social network questionnaire
In order to identify the sub-groups or cliques within the West Fife High Pipe Band, Clark made use of the so called “envelope game” whose aim “was to understand how the informants grouped themselves and others in the community” (Clark and Trousdale, Chapter 2: 40). Therefore every member of the pipe band received a deck of 54 cards, with each card containing the name of another band member. Each informant was then asked to sort the names into friendship groups, put the cards within the respective groups into an envelope and label it with something he or she felt characterized the group (cf. Cark and Trousdale, Chapter 2). In the end, by combining the envelopes of all 54 members, the researcher had developed a rough notion of the social structure within the band community. But as Clark and Trousdale say themselves, the “envelope game” is not a typical method for collecting social network data. They mention Cochrane et al. (1990) who developed a “social network questionnaire”, whose “purpose […] is to elicit information on both the quantity and quality of ties for each individual” (Clark and Trousdale, Chapter 2) and which “is emerging as a standard for eliciting social network data” (Clark and Trousdale, Chapter 2: 40).
The questionnaire was developed within the framework of a
program of research dealing with social networks, children, and families – a ten-year cooperative effort carried out by the authors as part of the Comparative Ecology of Human Development Project at Cornell University. Cochrane draws on this research in the concluding chapters to offer a new, integrated conception of how personal networks develop and how they affect and are affected by development. (Cochrane et al. 1990, Blurb)
Although in this case research is more focused on change, the questionnaire is nonetheless equally applicable to Clark and Trousale’s study as the description of the social structure of a specific person and community at a specific point in time is a central element in both studies. While Cochrane et al. had to conduct two questionnaire rounds, Clark and Trousdale only conducted one as they were not interested in changes concerning the phenomenon of th-fronting. Therefore they did not need to concern themselves with the question of how to design a follow-up interview without restricting the informants too much in their answers (for further information concerning such issues see Cochrane et al. 1990: 55f.). But, despite such differences, Clark and Trousdale could have used the social network questionnaire instead of the "envelope game" as well.
The social network questionnaire has a semi structured format, meaning that the number of possible answers is not restricted (for further information on how to design and conduct questionnaires see Krug and Sell, Chapter 4, in Research Methods in Language Variation and Change). As a social network is seen as “a specific set of linkages among a defined set of persons, with the additional property that the characteristics of these linkages as whole may be used to interpret the social behavior of the persons involved” (Cochrane et al. 1990: 49), it comprises seven network dimensions which are incorporated to a greater or lesser extent: network size, diversity, proximity, frequency, duration, content and intensity of relationship ties. Cochrane et al., however, emphasize that “because it is difficult (if not impossible) to map all of the relational bonds existing among a set of individuals, virtually all of what researchers refer to as social networks turn out to be partial rather than complete” (1990: 49). That means that some minor discrepancies have to be accepted as long as they are not predominant. Furthermore, due to the social network’s complexity, the nature of the questions asked by the researcher will always predetermine the final description of the community’s social structure (cf. Cochrane et al. 1990).
The baseline version of the social networks interview as presented by Cochrane et al. contained questions under 13 different headings (in italics):
To find out about each informant’s membership in the network, the interviewer asked each parent (in this particular case, the aim was to analyse the personal social networks of mothers and fathers with preschool-aged children) to name individuals “'who are important to you in one way or another'” (Cochrane et al. 1990: 52f.) beginning with neighbors, followed by relatives, workmates, schoolmates, organizations and agencies, and other friends (cf. size and diversity of role relationship). Afterwards, the informant was asked for information regarding the previously named network members. The questions were concerned with geographic proximity, frequency of contact, and duration of relationship (e.g. “Where does X live?”) (cf. location in time and space).
To collect information on age and family life stage of network members, respondents were asked to check those network members who were 'more than 20 years older than you are' and those 'who have children under the age of ten'. The sex of the network member was registered by the interviewer. (Cochrane et al. 1990: 53)
In order to elicit the content of the relationships, the informants where, for instance asked who it is they turn to in case they need a baby-sitter or personal advice. In regards to the intensity of relationship, they were requested to specify the network members “'who mean the most to you – who are the most important persons'” (Cochrane et al. 1990: 54).
In order to manage the complexity of the interviews and to shorten data collection time, all questions were asked in the form of “group-level questions”. Instead of asking too many questions in the style of “'Does he have young children' or 'Do you turn to him if you need a baby-sitter?'” (Cochrane et al. 1990: 51), the informants were asked to answer more general questions by ticking the names on a list they had generated at the beginning of the questionnaire (e.g. “'Please check those people on the list who have preschool-aged children'” (Cochrane et al. 1990: 51)).
In the end, Cochrane et al. had developed a relatively detailed notion not only of the members of each network but also of the quality of the relationship ties. Thus, the social network questionnaire is much more elaborate but also much more time-consuming than the “envelope-game” used by Clark and Trousdale. The decision as to which method to use should therefore be based on how important the quality of relationship for analyzing specific linguistic patters actually is. If they can be neglected to some extent, the “envelope-game” might be the easiest solution.
Created with the Personal Edition of HelpNDoc: Easily create iPhone documentation