Abstract
The concluding chapter reflects on the results, reviews the implications of the findings, and considers future directions for research. Based on the abstraction of support exchanges in transnational contexts, comparison of student and expatriate networks sheds light on how mobility is experienced in different situations. The accessibility of these new technologies is not just transforming distant relationships but is also affecting proximate support practices and experiences. The degree of connectedness in today’s digital age is contextualized with social transformation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
A global media study conducted by the University of Maryland College Park in 2010 on nearly 1000 students in ten countries on five continents (Chile, China, Slovakia, Mexico, Lebanon, UK, Argentina, US, and Uganda) who refrained from using all media for 24 hours. The students admitted that it was rather difficult to survive without any kind of media for a day.
References
Attree, P., French, B., Milton, B., Povall, S., Whitehead, M., & Popay, J. (2011). The experience of community engagement for individuals: A rapid review of evidence. Health & Social Care in the Community, 19(3), 250–260.
Baldassar, L., & Merla, L. (Eds.). (2013). Transnational families, migration and the circulation of care: Understanding mobility and absence in family life (Vol. 29). Routledge.
Baym, N. K. (2015). Personal connections in the digital age. John Wiley & Sons.
Chua, V., Madej, J., & Wellman, B. (2011). Personal communities: The world according to me. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 101–115). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dahinden, J. (2005). Contesting transnationalism? Lessons from the study of Albanian migration networks from former Yugoslavia. Global Networks, 5(2), 191–208.
Dahinden, J. (2009). Are we all transnationals now? Network transnationalism and transnational subjectivity: The differing impacts of globalization on the inhabitants of a small Swiss city. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(8), 1365–1386.
Gabriel, Z., & Bowling, A. (2004). Quality of life from the perspectives of older people. Ageing & Society, 24(5), 675–691.
Guarnizo, L. E., Portes, A., & Haller, W. (2003). Assimilation and transnationalism: Determinants of transnational political action among contemporary migrants. American Journal of Sociology, 108(6), 1211–1248.
Hampton, K., & Wellman, B. (2001). Long distance community in the network society: Contact and support beyond Netville. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 476–495.
Herz, A. (2015). Relational constitution of social support in migrants’ transnational personal communities. Social Networks, 40, 64–74.
Hogan, B. J. (2009). Networking in everyday life. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto.
Holmes, D. (2002). Virtual globalization – An introduction. In Virtual globalization (pp. 11–64). Routledge.
Homans, G. C. (1961). Human behavior: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace.
Kadushin, C. (1981). Long term stress reactions: Some causes, consequences, and naturally occurring support systems. Department of Sociology, State University of New York.
Lucassen, L. (2006). Is transnationalism compatible with assimilation? Examples from the Western Europe since 1850. Paper for the conference Migrants, Nations and Citizenship, CRASSH, University of Cambridge, 5–6 July.
Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K. E. (1984). Measuring tie strength. Social Forces, 63(2), 482–501.
Mok, D., & Wellman, B. (2007). Did distance matter before the Internet?: Interpersonal contact and support in the 1970s. Social Networks, 29(3), 430–461.
Montgomery, C. (2010). Understanding the international student experience. Palgrave Macmillan.
Portes, A. (1994). Introduction: Immigration and its aftermath. The International Migration Review, 28(4), 632–639.
Rizvi, F. (2005, March). International education and the production of cosmopolitan identities. In Transnational seminar series.
Song, F. W. (2009). Virtual communities: Bowling alone, online together. Peter Lang.
Theodore, N., & Martin, N. (2007). Migrant civil society: New voices in the struggle over community development. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(3), 269–287.
Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363–379.
Vacca, R. (2013). Bridging across nations. The social capital of diversity, brokerage and closure in transnational migrant networks: A study on assimilation patterns in Milan and Barcelona. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca.
Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism. London and New York: Routledge.
Viry, G. (2012). Residential mobility and the spatial dispersion of personal networks: Effects on social support. Social Networks, 34(1), 59–72.
Waldinger, R. (2010). Rethinking transnationalism. Empiria. Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales, 19, 21–38.
Wellman, B. (1979). The community question: The intimate networks of East Yorkers. American Journal of Sociology, 84(5), 1201–1231.
Wellman, B. (1997). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. Contemporary Studies in Sociology, 15, 19–61.
Wellman, B., & Wortley, S. (1990). Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 558–588.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kanagavel, R. (2019). Conclusion. In: The Social Lives of Networked Students. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96199-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96199-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96198-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96199-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)