Networks, Space, and Residents’ Perception of Cohesion

  • Adam Boessen
  • John R. Hipp
  • Emily J. Smith
  • Carter T. Butts
  • Nicholas N. Nagle
  • Zack Almquist
Original Article


Community scholars increasingly focus on the linkage between residents’ sense of cohesion with the neighborhood and their own social networks in the neighborhood. A challenge is that whereas some research only focuses on residents’ social ties with fellow neighbors, such an approach misses out on the larger constellation of individuals’ relationships and the spatial distribution of those relationships. Using data from the Twin Communities Network Study, the current project is one of the first studies to examine the actual spatial distribution of respondents’ networks for a variety of relationships and the consequences of these for neighborhood and city cohesion. We also examine how a perceived structural measure of cohesion—triangle degree—impacts their perceptions of neighborhood and city cohesion. Our findings suggest that perceptions of cohesion within the neighborhood and the city depend on the number of neighborhood safety contacts as well as on the types of people with which they discuss important matters. On the other hand, kin and social friendship ties do not impact cohesion. A key finding is that residents who report more spatially dispersed networks for certain types of ties report lower levels of neighborhood and city cohesion. Residents with higher triangle degree within their neighborhood safety networks perceived more neighborhood cohesion.


Cohesion Neighborhoods Space Social Networks 



This research was supported by NSF award BCS-0827027.


  1. Barone, C., Iscoe, E., Trickett, E., & Schmid, K. (1998). An ecologically differentiated, multifactor model of adolescent network orientation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(3), 403–423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bellair, P. (1997). Social interaction and community crime: Examining the importance of neighbor networks. Criminology, 35(4), 677–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birkel, R., & Reppucci, N. (1983). Social networks, information-seeking, and the utilization of services. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11(2), 185–205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Bollen, K., & Hoyle, R. (1990). Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., & Perugini, M., et al. (1999). Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(4), 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brodsky, A., O’Campo, P., & Aronson, R. (1999). Psoc in community context: Multi-level correlates of a measure of psychological sense of community in low-income, urban neighborhoods. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 659–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In N. Lin, K. S. Cook & R. S. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research. Sociology and economics: Controversy and integration series (pp. 31–56). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  9. Butts, C. T. (2002). Spatial models of large-scale interpersonal networks. Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
  10. Butts, C. T. (2009). Revisiting the foundations of network analysis. Science, 325, 414–416.Google Scholar
  11. Butts, C. T., Acton, R. M., Hipp, J. R., & Nagle, N. N. (2011). Geographical variability and network structure. Social Networks, 34(1), 82–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chavis, D. M., & Pretty, G. M. H. (1999). Sense of community: Advances in measurement and application. Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 2635–2642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chipuer, H., & Pretty, G. (1999). A review of the sense of community index: Current uses, factor structure, reliability, and further development. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 643–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christakopoulou, S., Dawson, J., & Gari, A. (2001). The community well-being questionnaire: Theoretical context and initial assessment of its reliability and validity. Social Indicators Research, 56(3), 319–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dillman, D. A. (1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Entwisle, B., Faust, K., Rindfuss, R., & Kaneda, T. (2007). Networks and contexts: Variation in the structure of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 112(5), 1495–1533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Felton, B., & Shinn, M. (1992). Social integration and social support: Moving “social support” beyond the individual level. Journal of Community Psychology, 20(2), 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fischer, C. (1982). To dwell among friends: Personal networks in town and city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Forrest, R., & Kearns, A. (2001). Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood. Urban Studies, 38(12), 2125–2143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Friedkin, N. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 409–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  23. Grannis, R. (2009). From the ground up: Translating geography into community through neighbor networks. Own book.Google Scholar
  24. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hagstrom, W. O., & Selvin, H. C. (1965). Two dimensions of cohesiveness in small groups. Sociometry, 28, 30–43.Google Scholar
  26. Hipp, J. R., & Boessen, A. (2013). Neighborhoods, social networks, and crime. In F. Cullen, P. Wilcox & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), Challenging criminological theory: The legacy of Ruth Kornhauser. Piscataway: Transaction.Google Scholar
  27. Hipp, J. R., Butts, C. T., Acton, R. M., Nagle, N. N., & Boessen, A. (2013). Extrapolative simulation of neighborhood networks based on population spatial distribution: Do they predict crime? Social Networks, 35(4), 614–625.Google Scholar
  28. Hipp, J. R., & Perrin, A. (2006). Nested loyalties: Local networks’ effects on neighbourhood and community cohesion. Urban Studies, 43(13), 2503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hirsch, B. (1979). Psychological dimensions of social networks: A multimethod analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 7(3), 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jagun, A., Brown, D., Milburn, N., & Gary, L. (1990). Residential satisfaction and socioeconomic and housing characteristics of urban black adults. Journal of Black Studies, 21(1), 40–51.Google Scholar
  33. Janowitz, M. (1967). The community press in an urban setting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kazak, A., & Wilcox, B. (1984). The structure and function of social support networks in families with handicapped children. American Journal of Community Psychology, 12(6), 645–661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kearns, A., & Forrest, R. (2000). Social cohesion and multilevel urban governance. Urban Studies, 37(5/6), 995–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kingston, S., Mitchell, R., Florin, P., & Stevenson, J. (1999). Sense of community in neighborhoods as a multi-level construct. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 681–694.Google Scholar
  37. Krackhardt, D., & Stern, R. N. (1988). Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Long, D., & Perkins, D. (2003). Confirmatory factor analysis of the sense of community index and development of a brief sci. Journal of Community Psychology, 31(3), 279–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martinez, M., Black, M., & Starr, R. (2002). Factorial structure of the perceived neighborhood scale (PNS): A test of longitudinal invariance. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(1), 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McDougall, W. (1920). The group mind: A sketch of the principles of collective psychology, with some attempt to apply them to the interpretation of national life and character. New York: G. P. Putnam’s.Google Scholar
  41. McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mesch, G., & Manor, O. (1998). Social ties, environmental perception, and local attachment. Environment and Behavior, 30(4), 504–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Messer, B. L., & Dillman, D. A. (2011). Surveying the general public over the internet using address-based sampling and mail contact procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(3), 429–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moody, J., & Paxton, P. (2009). Building bridges: Linking social capital and social networks to improve theory and research. American behavioral scientist, 52(11), 1491–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moody, J., & White, D. R. (2003). Social cohesion and embeddedness. American Sociological Review, 68, 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Obst, P., Smith, S., & Zinkiewicz, L. (2002). An exploration of sense of community, part 3: Dimensions and predictors of psychological sense of community in geographical communities. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(1), 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Oliver, P. (1984). If you don’t do it, nobody else will. American Sociological Review, 49(5), 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67, 254–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Paxton, P., & Moody, J. (2003). Structure and sentiment: Explaining emotional attachment to group. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(1), 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Peterson, N. A., Speer, P. W., Hughey, J., Armstead, T. L., Schneider, J. E., & Sheffer, M. A. (2008a). Community organizations and sense of community: Further development in theory and measurement. Journal of Community Psychology, 36(6), 798–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Peterson, N. A., Speer, P. W., & McMillan, D. W. (2008b). Validation of a brief sense of community scale: Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology, 36(1), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Richardson, R. J., Erickson, B. H., & Nosanchuk, T. A. (1979). Community size, network structure, and the flow of information. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 4, 379–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ross, C., & Jang, S. (2000). Neighborhood disorder, fear, and mistrust: The buffering role of social ties with neighbors. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28(4), 401–420.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sampson, R., Raudenbush, S., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.Google Scholar
  55. Seidman, E., Chesir-Teran, D., Friedman, J., Yoshikawa, H., Allen, L., & Roberts, A. (1999). The risk and protective functions of perceived family and peer microsystems among urban adolescents in poverty. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(2), 211–237.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Skjaeveland, O., Garling, T., & Maeland, J. (1996). A multidimensional measure of neighboring. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24(3), 413–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Unger, D., & Wandersman, A. (1983). Neighboring and its role in block organizations: An exploratory report. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11(3), 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wellman, B. (2002). Little boxes, glocalization, and networked individualism. In M. Tanabe, P. Van den Besselaar & T. Ishida (Eds.), Digital cities II: Computational and sociological approaches (pp. 10–25). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Community Research and Action 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Boessen
    • 1
  • John R. Hipp
    • 1
  • Emily J. Smith
    • 2
  • Carter T. Butts
    • 2
  • Nicholas N. Nagle
    • 3
  • Zack Almquist
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Criminology, Law, and SocietyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  2. 2.Department of Sociology, Institute for Mathematical and Behavioral SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  3. 3.Department of GeographyUniversity of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA
  4. 4.Department of Sociology, School of Statistics, Minnesota Population CenterUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations