Advertisement

Coresidence as a Mechanism of Relational Proximity: The Impact of Household Trajectories on the Diversification of Personal Networks

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life book series (PSFL)

Abstract

For a long time, the household unit—that is, the ‘ménage’—has been a privileged doorway to study family and personal life (Laslett 1972; Wall 2005). Yet, the transformations of family arrangements associated with divorce, informal cohabitation, migration, and ageing alongside the pluralization of the life course have been challenging the heuristic potential of the household unit to capture family meanings and practices (Bonvalet and Lelièvre 2013). More recent approaches (e.g., the configurational perspective) highlight the importance of focusing instead on the networks of meaningful relationships in which individuals are embedded in their everyday lives that can go beyond the limits of the household (Widmer 2010).

Keywords

Birth Cohort Network Member Young Cohort Personal Network Relational Proximity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abbott, A. 1995. Sequence Analysis: New Methods for Old Ideas. Annual Review of Sociology 21: 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ———. 1998. The Causal Devolution. Sociological Methods & Research 27(2): 148–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abbott, A., and A. Hrycak. 1990. Measuring Resemblance in Sequence Data: An Optimal Matching Analysis of Musicians’ Careers. American Journal of Sociology 96(1): 144–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abbott, A., and A. Tsay. 2000. Sequence Analysis and Optimal Matching Methods in Sociology: Review and Prospect. Sociological Methods & Research 29(1): 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aboim, S., and Vasconcelos, P. 2013, November 21. From Political to Social Generations: A Critical Reappraisal of Mannheim’s Classical Approach. European Journal of Social Theory 17(2): 165–183.Google Scholar
  6. Allan, G., G. Crow, and S. Hawker. 2011. Stepfamilies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bidart, C., and Lavenu, D. 2005. Evolutions of Personal Networks and Life Events. Social Networks 27(4): 359–376.Google Scholar
  8. Bonvalet, C., and E. Lelièvre. 2013. Significant Others and the Dynamics of the Family Network (from the Proches et Parents Survey to the Biographies et Entourage Survey). International Review of Sociology 23(1): 8–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Everitt, B.S. 2011. Cluster Analysis, 5th edn. Chichester: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fischer, C.S., and S.J. Oliker. 1983. A Research Note on Friendship, Gender, and the Life Cycle. Social Forces 62(1): 124–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gabadinho, A., G. Ritschard, M. Studer, and N. Müller. 2008. Mining Sequence Data in R with the TraMineR Package: A User’s Guide. Geneva: University of Geneva.Google Scholar
  12. Gabadinho, A., G. Ritschard, N.S. Müller, and M. Studer. 2011. Analyzing and Visualizing State Sequences in R with TraMineR. Journal of Statistical Software 40(4).Google Scholar
  13. Gauthier, J.-A. 2013. Optimal Matching, a Tool for Comparing Life Course Sequences. In Gendered Life Courses Between Standardization and Individualization. A European Approach Applied to Switzerland, ed. R. Levy, and E.D. Widmer, 37–49. Zürich, Berlin: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Goodwin, J., and H. O’Connor. 2015. A Critical Reassessment of the ‘Complexity’ Orthodoxy: Lessons from Existing Data and Youth ‘Legacy’ Studies. In A Critical Youth Studies for the 21st Century, ed. P. Kelly, and A. Kamp, 38–52. Brill: Leiden, Boston.Google Scholar
  15. Gouveia, R. 2014. Personal Networks in Portuguese Society: A Configurational and Lifecourse Approach. Tese de doutoramento em Sociologia. Lisboa: Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa.Google Scholar
  16. Gray, A. 2009. The Social Capital of Older People. Ageing & Society 29(1): 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Greenacre, M.J. 2007. Correspondence Analysis in Practice, 2nd edn. Boca Raton: Chapmann & Hall/CRC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hammel, E.A., and P. Laslett. 1974. Comparing Household Structure Over Time and Between Cultures. Comparative Studies in Society and History 16(1): 73–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Laslett, P. 1972. Introduction: the History of the Family. In Household and Family in Past Time, ed. P. Laslett, and R. Wall, 1–89. Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merton, R.K. 1968. The Matthew Effect in Science. Science 199: 55–63.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1988. The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property. Isis 79(4): 606–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O’Rand, A.M. 2001. Stratification and the Life Course: The Forms of Life Course Capital and Their Interrelationships. In Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, 5th edn, ed. R.H. Binstock, and L.K. George, 197–217. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Troll, L. 1987. Gender Differences in Cross-Generation Networks. Sex Roles 17(11–12): 751–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wall, K. 2005. Os grupos domésticos de co-residência. In Famílias em Portugal—Percursos, Interacções, Redes Sociais, ed. K. Wall, 553–597. Imprensa de Ciências Sociais: Lisboa.Google Scholar
  25. Wall, K., and R. Gouveia. 2014. Changing Meanings of Family in Personal Networks. Current Sociology 62(3): 352–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Widmer, E.D. 2010. Family Configurations. A Structural Approach to Family Diversity. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Widmer, E.D., and L.-A. La Farga. 2000. Family Networks: A Sociometric Method to Study Relationships in Families. Field Methods 12(2): 108–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Widmer, E.D., and G. Ritschard. 2013. Life Course Changes in Late Modernity: Towards Destandardization and De-gendering? In Gendered Life Courses Between Standardization and Individualization. A European Approach Applied to Switzerland, ed. L. Verlad, 161–181. Berlin / Zurich: Lit Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Widmer, E.D., G. Aeby, and M. Sapin. 2013. Collecting Family Network Data. International Review of Sociology 23(1): 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Social Sciences (ICS) at the University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.LIVES National Research CentreUniversity of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland
  3. 3.Institute of Social Sciences (ICS) at the University of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options