Abstract
AbstractThematic analysis of personal networks involves identifying regularities in network structure and content, and grouping networks into types/clusters, to allow for a holistic understanding of social complexities. We propose an inductive approach to network thematic analysis, applying the learnings from qualitative coding, fused mixed-methods analysis, and typology development. It involves framing (changing focus by magnifying, aggregating, and graphical configuration), pattern detection (identification of underlying dimensions, sorting, and clustering), labeling, and triangulating (confirmation and fine-tuning using quantitative and qualitative approaches); applied repeatedly and emergently. We describe this approach utilized in two cases of studying support networks of caregivers.
Highlights
Studying personal networks can provide important insights into the patterns and dynamics of social relations from the viewpoint of network actors
Similar to whole network analysis, various structural measures have been developed to describe the composition of personal networks, while no single variable can sufficiently explain the complexity of social relations
We review the current approaches to developing personal network typologies and propose a novel, fused mixed-methods approach to developing network typologies
Summary
Studying personal (egocentric) networks can provide important insights into the patterns and dynamics of social relations from the viewpoint of network actors. She classified personal support networks into: family-dependent (close relation with kin, usually based on shared household); locally integrated (close relation with family, friends, and neighbors, usually based on long-term residence and community involvement); locally self-contained (arm length relations, household lifestyle, and minimal community involvement); wider community-focused (active relationship with distant relatives, generally involved in community organizations, usually no local kin); and private restricted (minimal contacts) She developed an eight-item Practitioner Assessment of Network Type (PANT) questionnaire to assign individuals to the five network types, which has been crossvalidated in other contexts (Szabo et al, 2016). Even though these studies explicitly identified network maps as qualitative data, none elaborated on the qualitative process of integrating network composition and narratives, or the process of coding, clustering, and identifying network types
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
