![32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013–2473, USA
Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.
It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107631052
© Cambridge University Press 2014
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2014
Printed in the United States of America
A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data
Mixed methods social networks research / [edited by] Silvia Domínguez,
Northeastern University, Betina Hollstein, Hamburg University.
pages cm. – (Structural analysis in the social sciences)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-107-02792-3 (hardback : alk. paper)
1. Social networks – Research – Methodology. I. Domínguez, Silvia,
1961– II. Hollstein, Betina, 1965–
HM741.M59 2014
302.3–dc23 2013027222
ISBN 978-1-107-02792-3 Hardback
ISBN 978-1-107-63105-2 Paperback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or
accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in
this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is,
or will remain, accurate or appropriate.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2339731-250523233539-78eb4e25/85/Mixed-Methods-Social-Networks-Research-Design-And-Applications-Draft-Dominguez-S-12-320.jpg)
![Contributors xix
Silvia Domínguez, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Sociology and
Human Services at Northeastern University, Boston. Her research
interests include the social mobility of immigrants, transnational ties,
the acculturation of host individuals, cultural identity, violence, mental
health, and trauma as a neighborhood effect. She uses ethnographic
and qualitative data on her studies and is the author of several articles
on immigrants’ networks, including: with Celeste Watkins: Creating
Networks for Survival and Mobility: Social Capital among African-
American and Latin-American Low-Income Mothers, Social Problems
50, 1: 111–135 (2003); with Amy Lubitow: Transnational Ties, Poverty,
and Identity: Latin American Immigrant Women in Public Housing,
Family Relations 57, 4: 419–430 (2008). She is also the author of Getting
Ahead: Social Mobility, Public Housing and Immigrant Networks, a
book publication by New York University Press (2011). Silvia is the
Past Chair of the Latino (a) Sociology Section and present Chair-Elect
of the Race and Ethnic Minorities Section and American Sociological
Association.
Julia C. Gluesing, Ph.D., is a business and organizational anthropologist
and Research Professor in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering at
Wayne State University, Detroit, who specializes in global teaming and
global product development. She was the principal investigator of an NSF
grant to study the diffusion of innovation across the global enterprise by
tapping into an organization’s information technology infrastructure.
She conducts research in global work practices, and in cross-cultural
and organizational communication for companies such as Ford Motor
Company, Nissan Motor Corporation, Aegon, EDS Corporation, and
Sun Microsystems. She has published in Virtual Teams that Work:
Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness (2003), Handbook
of Managing Global Complexity (2003), and Crossing Cultures: Lessons
from Master Teachers (2004).
Roger Häussling, PD Dr. phil., sociologist, Professor of Sociology at
RWTH Aachen University, Germany. He is a Senior Research Fellow
at the Research Center, Karlsruhe University of Arts and Design; he
has been a Fellow at the International Academy Schloss Solitude and
a Dissertation Fellow at the Landesgraduiertenförderung Baden-
Württemberg (Germany). Academic education at the Universities of
Mannheim, Siegen, and Karlsruhe. He holds an M.A. (Magister Artium)
in sociology and a Diploma in economics and engineering. Relevant
Publications: Handbuch Netzwerkforschung [Handbook of nNt-
work Research] Wiesbaden: VS Verlag (2010, ed. vol., with Christian
Stegbauer); Allocation to Social Positions in Class. Interactions and
Relationships in First Grade School Classes and Their Consequences,
Current Sociology 58, 1 (2010).](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2339731-250523233539-78eb4e25/85/Mixed-Methods-Social-Networks-Research-Design-And-Applications-Draft-Dominguez-S-25-320.jpg)
![xx Contributors
Betina Hollstein, Dr. phil., sociology, at the Free University Berlin. She
holds a Chair in Microsociology at the School of Economics and Social
Sciences, University of Hamburg, Germany. She has been a lecturer
and researcher at the University of Munich and Assistant Professor at
Mannheim University and Humboldt-University Berlin. She has been a
Simon Visiting Professor at the University of Manchester, UK (2012)
and a Visiting Fellow at Yale University (2010). Her research interests
include social networks, sociology of the life course, social inequality,
and methods. Relevant publications: Grenzen sozialer Integration. Zur
Konzeption informeller Beziehungen und Netzwerke. [Boundaries of
Social Integration. A Simmelian Approach to Social Relationships and
Networks.] Opladen: Leske und Budrich (2001). Soziale Netzwerke nach
der Verwitwung [Changes in Social Networks after the Death of the
Spouse], Opladen: Leske und Budrich (2002); Qualitative Approaches,
Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott
Peter J. Carrington. London/ New Delhi: Sage, pp. 408–417 (2011).
Jeffrey C. Johnson, Dr. phil., Ph.D. in social science, University of
California, Irvine. Senior Scientist at the Institute for Coastal Science
and Policy, University Distinguished Research Professor of Sociology,
and Harriot College of Arts and Sciences Distinguished Professor at East
Carolina University, Greenville, NC. Adjunct positions in Anthropology,
Biology, Biostatistics and The Institute for Software Research at
Carnegie Mellon University. Research interests: social networks, net-
work visualizations, modelling indigenous ecological knowledge, small
group dynamics at Antarctic research stations, and complex models of
social and biological systems. Publications: more than 80 peer reviewed
publications, a.o. in The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, American
Anthropologist, American Ethnologist, Primates, Aviation, Space, and
Environmental Medicine, Journal of Computational and Mathematical
Organization Theory, Human Ecology, Social Networks, The Journal
of Theoretical Biology and Social Science and Medicine. Founder of
the Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, Associate Editor of The
Journal of Social Structure, Social Networks and Co-Editor of Human
Organization. Editorial board member of Field Methods, the Open
Sociology Journal, and the Developing Qualitative Inquiry series for
Left Coast Press. He is also co-author of Analyzing Social Networks
(2013).
Sylvia Keim, Dr. rer. pol., sociologist, Assistant Professor at the Institute
of Sociology and Demography, University of Rostock, Germany.
Research interests: sociology of the family and the life course, social net-
works, and qualitative research methods. Relevant publications: Social
Influence on Fertility: A Comparative Mixed Methods Study in Eastern
and Western Germany (with L. Bernardi and H. von der Lippe; Journal](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2339731-250523233539-78eb4e25/85/Mixed-Methods-Social-Networks-Research-Design-And-Applications-Draft-Dominguez-S-26-320.jpg)
![8 Bettina Hollstein
utilitarian models of action (“structural instrumentalism”; Emirbayer
and Goodwin 1994).4
According to these critics the challenge of network
research is to link the structural level with the actors involved. This would
particularly concern the systematic integration of their capacity to act
and actively shape their (social) environment as well as their reference to
norms, symbols, and cultural practices (Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994;
Mizruchi 1994; Schweizer 1996; Emirbayer 1997). As Dorothea Jansen
(1999) put it, “A significant theoretical problem [of network research;
BH] lies in the sparsely reflected relation between concrete networks and
interactions, on the one hand, and subjective attributions of meaning,
norms, and institutions, [as well as] cultures and symbolic worlds, on
the other. In their dispute with structural functionalism of the Parsonian
kind, network researchers have possibly thrown out the baby with the
bathwater in claiming absolute priority for concrete structures of inter-
action vis-à-vis norms and symbolic worlds of any kind” (p. 258 f; trans-
lated from German by BH). However, in recent network research, work
has been done that seeks to conceptually integrate agency and to take
cultural symbols and norms into account. Research from the quarters of
phenomenological network theory comes to mind (White 1992; Mische
2003; Gibson 2005; Yeung 2005).5
As we will show, mixed methods
studies can provide stimulating contributions in this respect as well.
What Do We Mean by “Mixed Methods” in
Social Network Research?
Let us now turn to the question of how network research can be posi-
tioned in relation to both quantitative and qualitative methods and what
4
Emirbayer and Goodwin (1994) differentiate, three theoretical positions with respect
to how social structure, culture and agency are conceptualized in network research:
“The first of these implicit models, that of structuralist determinism, neglects alto-
gether the potential causal role of actor’s beliefs, values, and normative commitments –
or, more generally, of the significance of cultural and political discourses in history.
It neglects as well those historical configurations of action that shape and transform
pregiven social structures in the first place. A second and more satisfactory – but still
deeply problematic – approach is that of structural instrumentalism. Studies within
this perspective accept the prominent role of social actors in history, but ultimatively
conceptualize their activity in narrowly utility-maximizing and instrumental forms.
And finally, the most sophisticated network perspective on social change, which we
term structuralist constructivism, thematizes provocatively certain historical pro-
cesses of identity conversion and ‘robust action.’ It is the most successful of all of these
approaches in adequately conceptualizing human agency and the potentially trans-
formative impact of cultural idioms and normative commitments on social action”
(Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994:1425f.; emphasis in the original).
5
Other approaches pointing in this direction are symbolic interactionism (Fine and
Klineman 1983), Bourdieu’s theory of practice, Latour’s actor-network theory (cf. Knox
et al. 2006) and Luhmann’s theory of social systems (cf. Fuhse and Mützel 2010).](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2339731-250523233539-78eb4e25/85/Mixed-Methods-Social-Networks-Research-Design-And-Applications-Draft-Dominguez-S-46-320.jpg)
Mixed Methods Social Networks Research Design And Applications Draft Dominguez S
- 1. Mixed Methods Social Networks Research Design And Applications Draft Dominguez S download https://ebookbell.com/product/mixed-methods-social-networks- research-design-and-applications-draft-dominguez-s-4679462 Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com
- 2. Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. Social Networks And Fertility Decisionmaking A Mixedmethods Study On Personal Relations And Social Influence On Family Formation 2011th Edition Sylvia Keim https://ebookbell.com/product/social-networks-and-fertility- decisionmaking-a-mixedmethods-study-on-personal-relations-and-social- influence-on-family-formation-2011th-edition-sylvia-keim-2375336 Mixed Methods Social Network Analysis Theories And Methodologies In Learning And Education Dominik E Froehlich https://ebookbell.com/product/mixed-methods-social-network-analysis- theories-and-methodologies-in-learning-and-education-dominik-e- froehlich-42808846 Parenting Programmes What The Parents Say A Case Study In Mixed Methods Social Science Research 1st Ed Katy Smart https://ebookbell.com/product/parenting-programmes-what-the-parents- say-a-case-study-in-mixed-methods-social-science-research-1st-ed-katy- smart-22497282 Social Research Methods Qualitative Quantitative And Mixed Methods Approaches 1st Edition Sigmund Grnmo https://ebookbell.com/product/social-research-methods-qualitative- quantitative-and-mixed-methods-approaches-1st-edition-sigmund- grnmo-35140878
- 3. Mixed Methods Perspectives On Communication And Social Media Research 1st Edition Reynaldo Gacho Segumpan Joanna Soraya Abu Zahari https://ebookbell.com/product/mixed-methods-perspectives-on- communication-and-social-media-research-1st-edition-reynaldo-gacho- segumpan-joanna-soraya-abu-zahari-43577032 Methods That Matter Integrating Mixed Methods For More Effective Social Science Research M Cameron Hay Editor https://ebookbell.com/product/methods-that-matter-integrating-mixed- methods-for-more-effective-social-science-research-m-cameron-hay- editor-51442280 Methods That Matter Integrating Mixed Methods For More Effective Social Science Research M Cameron Hay Editor https://ebookbell.com/product/methods-that-matter-integrating-mixed- methods-for-more-effective-social-science-research-m-cameron-hay- editor-5749464 Foundations Of Mixed Methods Research Integrating Quantitative And Qualitative Approaches In The Social And Behavioral Sciences Paperback Abbas Tashakkori Charles Teddlie https://ebookbell.com/product/foundations-of-mixed-methods-research- integrating-quantitative-and-qualitative-approaches-in-the-social-and- behavioral-sciences-paperback-abbas-tashakkori-charles- teddlie-10007574 The Social Construction Of The Us Academic Elite A Mixed Methods Study Of Two Disciplines 1st Edition Stephanie Beyer https://ebookbell.com/product/the-social-construction-of-the-us- academic-elite-a-mixed-methods-study-of-two-disciplines-1st-edition- stephanie-beyer-46697770
- 7. Mixed Methods Social Networks Research Design and Applications This edited volume demonstrates the potential of mixed methods designs for the research of social networks and the utilization of social networks for other research. Mixing methods applies to the combination and integra- tion of qualitative and quantitative methods. In social network research, mixing methods also applies to the combination of structural and actor- oriented approaches. The volume provides readers with methodological concepts to guide mixed method network studies with precise research designs and methods to investigate social networks of various sorts. Each chapter describes the research design used and discusses the strengths of the methods for that particular field and for specific outcomes. Silvia Domínguez is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Human Services in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Northeastern University. Betina Hollstein is Chair of Microsociology in the School of Economics, and Social Sciences at the University of Hamburg.
- 9. Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences Mark Granovetter, editor The series Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences presents studies that ana- lyze social behavior and institutions by reference to relations among such con- crete social entities as persons, organizations, and nations. Relational analysis contrasts on the one hand with reductionist methodological individualism and on the other with macro-level determinism, whether based on technol- ogy, material conditions, economic conflict, adaptive evolution, or functional imperatives. In this more intellectually flexible structural middle ground, ana- lysts situate actors and their relations in a variety of contexts. Since the series began in 1987, its authors have variously focused on small groups, history, culture, politics, kinship, aesthetics, economics, and complex organizations, creatively theorizing how these shape and in turn are shaped by social rela- tions. Their style and methods have ranged widely, from intense, long-term ethnographic observations to highly abstract mathematical models. Their dis- ciplinary affiliations have included history, anthropology, sociology, political science, business, economics, mathematics, and computer science. Some have made explicit use of social network analysis, including many of the cutting- edge and standard works of that approach, whereas others have kept formal analysis in the background and used “networks” as a fruitful orienting meta- phor. All have in common a sophisticated and revealing approach that force- fully illuminates our complex social world. Other Books in the Series 1. Mark S. Mizruchi and Michael Schwartz, eds., Intercorporate Relations: The Structural Analysis of Business 2. Barry Wellmann and S. D. Berkowitz, eds., Social Structures: A Network Approach 3. Ronald L. Breiger, ed., Social Mobility and Social Structure 4. David Knoke, Political Networks: The Structural Perspective 5. John L. Campbell, J. Rogers Hollingsworth, and Leon N. Lindberg, eds., Governance of the American Economy 6. Kyriakos M. Kontopoulos, The Logics of Social Structure 7. Philippa Pattison, Algebraic Models for Social Structure 8. Stanley Wasserman and Katherine Faust, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications 9. Gary Herrigel, Industrial Constructions: The Sources of German Industrial Power 10. Philippe Bourgois, In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio, Second Edition 11. Per Hage and Frank Harary, Island Networks: Communication, Kinship, and Classification Structures in Oceana 12. Thomas Schweitzer and Douglas R. White, eds., Kinship, Networks, and Exchange 13. Noah E. Friedkin, A Structural Theory of Social Influence
- 11. Mixed Methods Social Networks Research Design and Applications Edited by Silvia Domínguez Northeastern University Betina Hollstein Hamburg University
- 12. 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013–2473, USA Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107631052 © Cambridge University Press 2014 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2014 Printed in the United States of America A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data Mixed methods social networks research / [edited by] Silvia Domínguez, Northeastern University, Betina Hollstein, Hamburg University. pages cm. – (Structural analysis in the social sciences) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-107-02792-3 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Social networks – Research – Methodology. I. Domínguez, Silvia, 1961– II. Hollstein, Betina, 1965– HM741.M59 2014 302.3–dc23 2013027222 ISBN 978-1-107-02792-3 Hardback ISBN 978-1-107-63105-2 Paperback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
- 13. In memory of our colleague and friend Janet W. Salaff
- 15. ix List of Tables page xi List of Figures xiii Contributors xvii Foreword by H. Russell Bernard xxvii Acknowledgments xxxi Part I. General Issues 1 Mixed Methods Social Networks Research: An Introduction 3 Betina Hollstein 2 Social Network Research 35 Peter J. Carrington 3 Triangulation and Validity of Network Data 65 Andreas Wald 4 A Network Analytical Four-Level Concept for an Interpretation of Social Interaction in Terms of Structure and Agency 90 Roger Häussling Part II. Mixed Methods Applications 5 Social Networks, Social Influence, and Fertility in Germany: Challenges and Benefits of Applying a Parallel Mixed Methods Design 121 Laura Bernardi, Sylvia Keim, and Andreas Klärner 6 Two Sides of the Same Coin : The Integration of Personal Network Analysis with Ethnographic and Psychometric Strategies in the Study of Acculturation 153 Isidro Maya-Jariego and Silvia Domínguez Contents
- 16. x Contents 7 Adaptation to New Legal Procedures in Rural China: Integrating Survey and Ethnographic Data 177 Christine B. Avenarius and Jeffrey C. Johnson 8 Mixing Ethnography and Information Technology Data Mining to Visualize Innovation Networks in Global Networked Organizations 203 Julia C. Gluesing, Kenneth R. Riopelle, and James A. Danowski Part III. New Methodological Approaches Used in Mixed Methods Designs 9 Fuzzy-Set Analysis of Network Data as Mixed Method: Personal Networks and the Transition from School to Work 237 Betina Hollstein and Claudius Wagemann 10 Reconstructing Social Networks through Text Analysis: From Text Networks to Narrative Actor Networks 269 Joan Miquel Verd and Carlos Lozares 11 Giving Meaning to Social Networks: Methodology for Conducting and Analyzing Interviews Based on Personal Network Visualizations 305 José Luis Molina, Isidro Maya-Jariego, and Christopher McCarty 12 Simulating the Social Networks and Interactions of Poor Immigrants 336 Bruce Rogers and Cecilia Menjívar Index 357
- 17. xi 1.1 Overview of the book page 24 3.1 Category and subcategories 79 3.2 Network building in the field of astrophysics 80 3.3 Framework for the selection of a triangulating research design 84 5.1 Composition of the ego and alter sample by sex and education 128 6.1 A three-step procedure to the interactive study of acculturation 162 7.1 The five data–collection instruments and their methods of analysis 187 8.1 Comparison of Top Three Communication Relationship and Top Three E-Mail Relationship Networks 223 9.1 Conditions – Overview 251 9.2 Employment in the labor market: Analysis of necessary conditions (men) 254 9.3 Employment in the labor market: Analysis of sufficient conditions (men) 256 9.4 Truth table for men 257 9.5 Employment in the labor market: Analysis of necessary conditions (women) 258 9.6 Employment in the labor market: Analysis of sufficient conditions (women) 259 9.7 Non-occurrence of employment: Analysis of sufficient conditions (women) 261 10.1 Matrix of actors by ambits: Interview with Miguel 288 10.2 Matrix of actors by ambits: Interview with Santi 288 10.3 Respondents and their specific characteristics 294 List of Tables
- 18. xii List of Tables 11.1 Main outcomes of personal network visualizations 316 11.2 Comparisons of the two types of visualizations (n = 170) 319 11.3 Reasons given by respondent about observed changes in their personal networks classified in “evolution” and “involution” 324 11.4 Research projects in which the protocol for data collection and analysis has been developed and applied 331 12.1 Income distribution for each job level 340 12.2 Rent distribution for each housing level 340 12.3 Updating exchange probabilities after A asks B for aid 342 12.4 Probability of acquiring information about each job and housing level 344 12.5 Probability of becoming unemployed 345 12.6 Average number of exchange partners for each parameter setting 350
- 19. xiii 2.1 Representations of a hypothetical social network page 37 2.2 Directed graph for asymmetric relation 44 2.3 Example graphs showing connectivity 48 2.4 Example graphs for k-connectivity calculations 50 3.1 Name generator and name interpreter 76 3.2 Networks of cooperation in astrophysics 81 4.1 Intensive contacts: (a) formal and (b) informal 102 4.2 Diagram illustrating the new office concept 105 4.3 Network map used in the interviews for charting persons (members of the department or other persons relevant to the work setting), objects, and circumstances according to significance 108 5.1 The network chart 131 5.2 The network grid 133 5.3 Network members’ importance by type of relationship 137 5.4 Family-centered network 140 5.5 Heterogeneous network 141 5.6 Childfree-by-choice network 143 6.1 Two strategies in the study of acculturation 160 6.2 Example of the personal network of an Ecuadorian immigrant in Spain 164 6.3 Ecuadorian immigrants in the personal networks of host individuals 165 8.1 IT-based e-mail data collection process 210 8.2 The Emotion Score Plot for ATI (the Losada line is at 2.9, the threshold point at which teams flourish or flounder 215 8.3 Triadic communication by organizational level in ATI 218 8.4 Twelve interview respondents and their communication network relationships 219 List of Figures
- 20. xiv List of Figures 8.5 Twelve interview respondents and their top three communication relationship network 220 8.6 Single group in the top three communication relationship network 220 8.7 Twelve interview respondents and their top three e-E-mail relationship network 221 8.8 Two sub-groups in the top three e-mail relationship network 222 8.9 Combined top three communication and e-mail networks 224 10.1 Word-network map from descriptions of listeners’ favorite radio stations 274 10.2 Knowledge graph of labor market theories according to control theory 278 10.3 Example of the coding 283 10.4 Example of the aggregation of codes and relations 284 10.5 Actors mentioned in the narrative of Miguel and causal connections with events in the training and employment pathway 285 10.6 Actors mentioned in the narrative of Santi and causal connections with events in the training and employment pathway 286 10.7 Egocentric network of Miguel 289 10.8 Components of Miguel’s network without ego 289 10.9 Egocentric network of Santi 290 10.10 Components of Santi’s network without ego 291 11.1 Two visualizations of the same personal network (with labels indicating different variables) 309 11.2 Four examples of different personal network visualizations: Argentinean woman, Senegalese male (mandinga), Moroccan male (amazig), Dominican male 311 11.3 Example of a clustered graph representing a migrant personal network (Dominicans in Spain, Dominicans in the United States) 313 11.4 Examples of two clustered graphs aggregated (author: Jürgen Lerner) 314 11.5 Two types of personal network visualization 318 11.6 Three-step procedure to identify communities from personal network visualizations 322 11.7 Two clustered graphs of the same individual 325 11.8 Process of acculturation shown through a sequence of personal networks 326
- 21. List of Figures xv 11.9 General mode of change 328 11.10 Ideal types of adaptation to the host country 329 12.1 The distribution of agents in the four different job and housing levels over time 347 12.2 The change in the number of network connections over time for four different simulation runs 349
- 23. xvii ChristineB.Avenarius,Dr.phil.,SocioculturalAnthropologist,Associate Professor for Anthropology at East Carolina University. Academic edu- cation at the Universität zu Köln (Th. Schweitzer), Germany; at Peking University, China; and at the University of California, Irvine. Research interests: social networks, legal anthropology, cognitive anthropology, ethnicity, integration, migration, conflict resolution, globalization, East Asia, China. Relevant publications: Work and Social Network Composition among Immigrants from Taiwan to Southern California, Anthropology of Work Review, 2003: 23, 3–4: 3–15; Conflict, Cooperation, and Integration among Subethnic Immigrant Groups from Taiwan. Population, Space and Place, 2007: 13, 2: 95–112; The Role of Information Technology in Reducing Social Obligations Among Immigrants from Taiwan. Journal of International Communication 2008, 14, 1; To Bribe or Not to Bribe: Comparing Perceptions About Justice, Morality, And Inequality Among Rural And Urban Chinese. Urban Anthropology 2012: 41 (2,3,4): 247–291. Laura Bernardi, Prof. Dr., Demographer, is Associate Professor for Life Course Research at the University of Lausanne and Deputy Director of the Swiss National Center for Competence in Research “Overcoming Vulnerability in the Life Course.” Education at the University of Rome La Sapienza (Italy), at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium), and at Brown University (US). She has been prin- cipal investigator of numerous projects about fertility and family in Europe funded by the Max Planck Gesellschaft, the U.S. National Institute for Health, and the European Community. Main research interests: population fertility, family sociology, life course, social networks, anthropological demography, social research mixed meth- ods. Selected publications: Bernardi, L.: Channels of Social Influence on Reproduction. Population Research and Policy Review 2003, Contributors
- 24. xviii Contributors 22: 527–555; Bernardi, L., H. von der Lippe, and A. Klaerner: Job Instability and Parenthood, European Journal of Population 24, 3: 287–313, 2008; Fuerrnkranz-Prskawetz, A., T. Fent, B. Aparacio, and Bernardi, L.: Transition to Parenthood: The Role of Social Interaction and Endogenous Networks, Demography, 2010. Peter J. Carrington, Ph.D., is Professor of Sociology and Legal Studies at the University of Waterloo and editor of the Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice. His current research project, the Canadian Criminal Careers and Criminal Networks Study, combines his long-standing interests in social network analysis and the development of crime and delinquency. His articles have appeared in the Journal of Mathematical Sociology, Social Networks, Criminology, the Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, and Criminal Justice Policy Review. He is editor of Applications of Social Network Analysis (Sage Publicationsforthcoming) and co-editor of The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis (Sage Publications, 2011) and Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (Cambridge University Press, 2005). James A. Danowski, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor (ret.) in Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Recent publi- cations include: Yuan, E. J, Feng, M., Danowski, J. A. (forthcom- ing, 2013) “Privacy in semantic networks on Chinese social media: The case of Sina Weibo, Journal of Communication; Danowski, J. A. (2012). Social network size and designers’ semantic networks for collabora- tion. International Journal of Organization Design and Engineering, 2(4/2012), 343–361. Danowski, J. A. (2012). Mining social networks at the organizational level. In I-Hsien Ting, Tzung-Pei Hong and Leon S.L. Wang (Eds.) Social network mining, Analysis and research trends: Techniques and applications. (pp. 205–230) Hershey, PA: IGI-Global.; Counterterrorism mining for individuals semantically-similar to watch list members. U. K. Wiil (Ed.). Counterterrorism and open-source intel- ligence: Models, tools, techniques, and case studies Lecture Notes in Social Networks, Vol. 2, 1–6 (pps. 223–247). Berlin: Springer DOI: 10.1007/978–3-7091–0388–3_1. Danowski, J. A., Riopelle, K., Gluesing, J. (2011). The revolution in diffusion models caused by new media: The shift from s-shaped to convex curves. In G.A. Barnett A. Vishwanath (Eds.) The diffusion of innovations: A communication science perspective, (pps. 123–144). New York: Peter Lang Publishing; Danowski, J. A., Duran, M.V., Diaz, A. C., Jimenez, J.L.T. (2011). Semantic networks for corporate communication concepts and crisis: Differences based on corporate reputation. Observatorio (OBS*), 6(2), 127–145. Danowski, J. A. (2010). Inferences from word networks in messages. In K. Krippendorff M. Bock (Eds.) The content analysis reader (pp. 421–430). Sage Publications.
- 25. Contributors xix Silvia Domínguez, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Human Services at Northeastern University, Boston. Her research interests include the social mobility of immigrants, transnational ties, the acculturation of host individuals, cultural identity, violence, mental health, and trauma as a neighborhood effect. She uses ethnographic and qualitative data on her studies and is the author of several articles on immigrants’ networks, including: with Celeste Watkins: Creating Networks for Survival and Mobility: Social Capital among African- American and Latin-American Low-Income Mothers, Social Problems 50, 1: 111–135 (2003); with Amy Lubitow: Transnational Ties, Poverty, and Identity: Latin American Immigrant Women in Public Housing, Family Relations 57, 4: 419–430 (2008). She is also the author of Getting Ahead: Social Mobility, Public Housing and Immigrant Networks, a book publication by New York University Press (2011). Silvia is the Past Chair of the Latino (a) Sociology Section and present Chair-Elect of the Race and Ethnic Minorities Section and American Sociological Association. Julia C. Gluesing, Ph.D., is a business and organizational anthropologist and Research Professor in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering at Wayne State University, Detroit, who specializes in global teaming and global product development. She was the principal investigator of an NSF grant to study the diffusion of innovation across the global enterprise by tapping into an organization’s information technology infrastructure. She conducts research in global work practices, and in cross-cultural and organizational communication for companies such as Ford Motor Company, Nissan Motor Corporation, Aegon, EDS Corporation, and Sun Microsystems. She has published in Virtual Teams that Work: Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness (2003), Handbook of Managing Global Complexity (2003), and Crossing Cultures: Lessons from Master Teachers (2004). Roger Häussling, PD Dr. phil., sociologist, Professor of Sociology at RWTH Aachen University, Germany. He is a Senior Research Fellow at the Research Center, Karlsruhe University of Arts and Design; he has been a Fellow at the International Academy Schloss Solitude and a Dissertation Fellow at the Landesgraduiertenförderung Baden- Württemberg (Germany). Academic education at the Universities of Mannheim, Siegen, and Karlsruhe. He holds an M.A. (Magister Artium) in sociology and a Diploma in economics and engineering. Relevant Publications: Handbuch Netzwerkforschung [Handbook of nNt- work Research] Wiesbaden: VS Verlag (2010, ed. vol., with Christian Stegbauer); Allocation to Social Positions in Class. Interactions and Relationships in First Grade School Classes and Their Consequences, Current Sociology 58, 1 (2010).
- 26. xx Contributors Betina Hollstein, Dr. phil., sociology, at the Free University Berlin. She holds a Chair in Microsociology at the School of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Hamburg, Germany. She has been a lecturer and researcher at the University of Munich and Assistant Professor at Mannheim University and Humboldt-University Berlin. She has been a Simon Visiting Professor at the University of Manchester, UK (2012) and a Visiting Fellow at Yale University (2010). Her research interests include social networks, sociology of the life course, social inequality, and methods. Relevant publications: Grenzen sozialer Integration. Zur Konzeption informeller Beziehungen und Netzwerke. [Boundaries of Social Integration. A Simmelian Approach to Social Relationships and Networks.] Opladen: Leske und Budrich (2001). Soziale Netzwerke nach der Verwitwung [Changes in Social Networks after the Death of the Spouse], Opladen: Leske und Budrich (2002); Qualitative Approaches, Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, edited by John Scott Peter J. Carrington. London/ New Delhi: Sage, pp. 408–417 (2011). Jeffrey C. Johnson, Dr. phil., Ph.D. in social science, University of California, Irvine. Senior Scientist at the Institute for Coastal Science and Policy, University Distinguished Research Professor of Sociology, and Harriot College of Arts and Sciences Distinguished Professor at East Carolina University, Greenville, NC. Adjunct positions in Anthropology, Biology, Biostatistics and The Institute for Software Research at Carnegie Mellon University. Research interests: social networks, net- work visualizations, modelling indigenous ecological knowledge, small group dynamics at Antarctic research stations, and complex models of social and biological systems. Publications: more than 80 peer reviewed publications, a.o. in The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, American Anthropologist, American Ethnologist, Primates, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, Journal of Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Human Ecology, Social Networks, The Journal of Theoretical Biology and Social Science and Medicine. Founder of the Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, Associate Editor of The Journal of Social Structure, Social Networks and Co-Editor of Human Organization. Editorial board member of Field Methods, the Open Sociology Journal, and the Developing Qualitative Inquiry series for Left Coast Press. He is also co-author of Analyzing Social Networks (2013). Sylvia Keim, Dr. rer. pol., sociologist, Assistant Professor at the Institute of Sociology and Demography, University of Rostock, Germany. Research interests: sociology of the family and the life course, social net- works, and qualitative research methods. Relevant publications: Social Influence on Fertility: A Comparative Mixed Methods Study in Eastern and Western Germany (with L. Bernardi and H. von der Lippe; Journal
- 27. Contributors xxi of Mixed Methods Research 1,1, 23–47; Qualifying Social Influence on Fertility Intentions: Composition, Structure and Meaning of Fertility- relevant Social Networks in Western Germany (with A. Klärner and L. Bernardi; Current Sociology, 2009, 57, 6, 888–907). Andreas Klärner, Dr. phil., sociologist, Guest Professor at the University of Hamburg, and Assistant Professor at the University of Rostock, Germany. Academic education at the Technical University Darmstadt, and then research positions at the Hamburg Institute for Social Research and the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. Research interests: social networks, social capital, sociological theory, and quali- tative research methods. Relevant publications: Tie Strength and Family Formation: Which Personal Relationships Are Influential? (with S. Keim and L. Bernardi; Personal Relationships, 2012, early view). Carlos Lozares, Professor of Social Research Techniques and Methods at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain. Co-founding mem- ber of the Centre d’Estudis Sociològics sobre la Vida Quotidiana i el Treball (QUIT). His research subjects and publications refer to data analysis, multivariate and stratified sampling and the methodology of large surveys, mathematical modelling and the methodology of social research; to the analysis of social networks, social capital and the net- work analysis of discourse; to social time, the interactions between pro- ductive and reproductive practices and time and, more extensively, to the sociology of everyday life. His current interests are also focused on eth- nographic analyses, situated activity and socially distributed knowledge, and social complexity and simulation. Most recent publications: Carlos Lozares and Pedro López-Roldán (2012) El Atributismo estructural y el Interaccionismo estructural en ciencias sociales: ¿concepciones alter- nativas, antagónicas o complementarias? Metodología de Encuestas. Revista de la Sociedad Internacional de Profesionales de la Investigación en Encuestas, 14: 25–44; Carlos Lozares, Joan Miquel Verd and Oriol Barranco (2013) El potencial analítico de las redes socio-métricas y ego-centradas: una aplicación al estudio de la Cohesión-Integración de colectivos sociales, Empiria, 26: 35–62; Mireia Bolíbar, Joel Martí and Carlos Lozares (2013) Aplicaciones de los métodos mixtos al análisis de las redes personales de la población inmigrada, Empiria, 26: 89–116. Isidro Maya-Jariego, Doctor in Psychology. Full Professor at the Department of Social Psychology at the University of Seville, Spain. Director of the Laboratory of Personal Networks and Communities. Assistant Dean of the Faculty of Psychology. Coordinator of the Master in Psychology of Social and Community Intervention and the Doctorate Program “Community and Social Intervention.” Editor of the journal REDES, Revista Hispana para el Análisis de Redes Sociales. His main
- 28. xxii Contributors interests are social network analysis, social and community intervention, and migration and cultural diversity. He has researched on social sup- port and personal networks of international immigrants. His most recent research compares the psychological sense of community in local, trans- national, and on-line communities. Relevant publications: Domínguez, S. Maya-Jariego,I.(2008):Acculturation of Host Individuals: Immigrants and Personal Networks, American Journal of Community Psychology; Maya-Jariego, I. Armitage, N. (2007): Multiple Senses of Community in Migration and Commuting: The Interplay between Time, Space and Relations, International Sociology, 22, 6, 743–766. Christopher McCarty is Director of the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida and currently a rotating program officer at in the Cultural Anthropology Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. His areas of research include the development of new methods and tools for studying personal networks in a transcul- tural framework, collaborative networks and survey research methods. He is the author of the software package Egonet, a program for the collection and analysis of personal networks.. Relevant publications: Peter D. Killworth, Christopher McCarty, H. Russell Bernard, Eugene Johnsen, John Domini and Gene A. Shelley (2003): Two Interpretations of Reports of Knowledge of Subpopulation Sizes, Social Networks, 25, 2: 141–160; Christopher McCarty, José Luis Molina, Claudia Aguilar, and Laura Rota (2007): A Comparison of Social Network Mapping and Personal Network Visualization, Field Methods 19, 2: 145–162. Cecilia Menjívar is the Cowden Distinguished Professor of Sociology in the School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University. Her research interests include family, gender, and intergenerational relations among immigrant populations, religion and the church, and immigrants’ transnational ties, as well as similar substantive issues in non-immigrant contexts in Central America. She has used various meth- ods in her work, including ethnographic and other qualitative methods. She is the author of several articles on immigrants’ networks which have appeared in such journals as International Migration Review, American Journal of Sociology, International Migration, Journal of Comparative Family Studies, Social Problems, and Sociology of Religion, as well as the book, Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America (University of California Press, 2000). José Luis Molina is head of the Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology (UAB) and Director of the Personal Networks Lab, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain. His areas of interest are economic anthropology and social networks, especially the change among ethnics groups moving to other countries. Southeast Europe is his
- 29. Contributors xxiii ethnographical area of interest. Recent publications: Miranda Lubbers, José Luis Molina, and Chris McCarty (2007): Personal Networks and Ethnic Identifications: The Case of Migrants in Spain, International Sociology 22, 6: 720–740; José Luis Molina (2007): The Development of Social Network Analysis In the Spanish-Speaking World: A Spanish Chronicle, Social Networks 29, 2: 324–329. Kenneth R. Riopelle, Ph.D., is an educator, entrepreneur, management consultant and retired research professor at the Department of Industrial Systems Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI. His pro- fessional career spans more than 40 years in both the auto industry and academia. His primary research interests include Accelerating the Diffusion of Innovations in Globally Networked Organizations, which was funded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant from 2005– 2010; the study of Collaborative Innovation Networks or COINs; and the Science of Team Science using co-author and co-citation analysis as a method to visualize, measure, and understand scientific collaboration. Relevant publications: Riopelle, Ken (2012): Being There: The Power of Technology-based Methods. In Advancing Ethnography in Corporate Environments: Challenges and Emerging Opportunities, Brigitte Jordan, ed.,Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press; Danowski, James, Julia Gluesing, and Kenneth Riopelle (2011): The Revolution in Diffusion Caused by New Media. In The Diffusion of Innovations: A Communication Science Perspective, Arun Vishwanath and George Barnett, eds., pp. 123–144, New York: Peter Lang; McKether, Willie L., Julia C. Gluesing, and Kenneth Riopelle (2009): From Interviews to Social Network Analysis: An Approach for Revealing Social Networks Embedded in Narrative Data, Field Methods 21, ()154–180. Bruce Rogers was awarded his Ph.D. in Mathematics from Arizona State University in 2009 and considers himself a social scientist trapped in a mathematicians body. As such, much of his research is devoted to computational social science in the broadest sense using both com- puter simulation and data analysis. From 2009 to 2011, he was a post- doctoral Fellow at the Statistical and Applied Mathematical Sciences Institute in North Carolina. He is currently a statistical consultant in St. Louis, Missouri, and he loves dogs. Relevant publications: Control of Opinions in an Ideologically Homogeneous Population, Proceedings of Social Computation, Behavioral Modeling, and Prediction Conference, 2009 (with David Murillo); On the Stability of Swarm Consensus under Noisy Control, Proceedings of the ASME Dynamic System and Control Conference, pp 291–298, 2011 (with Gregory K. Fricke and Devendra P. Garg); Aggregation and Rendezvous in an Unbounded Domain without a Shared Coordinate System, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on
- 30. xxiv Contributors Decision and Control and European Control Conference, pp 1437–1442, 2011 (with Gregory K. Fricke and Devendra P. Garg). Joan Miquel Verd, Graduate in Political Science and Sociology, Graduate in Economics and Business Studies, PhD in Sociology. He is a member of the Centre d’Estudis Sociològics sobre la Vida Quotidiana i el Treball (QUIT) in the Department of Sociology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain and a Professor of Social Research Methods at the same university. His research activity focuses on the relationship between training and employment, labor market trajectories, and the links between social protection and employment. Methodologically, he is interested on discourse analysis, narrative analysis, social network analysis, and CAQDAS use. Recent publications: Employer strategies, capabilities and career development: two case studies of Spanish service firms, International Journal of Manpower, 34 (4): 292–304, 2013 (with Martí López-Andreu); La fuerza de los lazos: una exploración teórica y empírica de sus múltiples significados, Empiria, 16: 149–174, 2013 (with Irene Cruz); Individual working lives through the lens of the capa- bility approach: evaluation of policies and items for debate, Transfer, 18(1): 83–89, 2012 (with Emanuela Abbatecola, Florence Lefresne, and Josiane Vero). Claudius Wagemann, Ph.D., political scientist, works as a full professor for qualitative social science methods at the Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany. Previously, he had held positions at the Istituto italiano di scienze umane (SUM) in Florence and at the Florence program of New York University. He received his education at the University of Konstanz (Diplom degree), the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, and at the European University Institute in Florence (Ph.D.). Research interests: comparative methodology (above all qualitative comparative analysis and fuzzy sets); political participation (political parties, interest groups, social movements); quality of democracy; and governance. Selected publications: Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Cambridge University Press (2012) (with C. Q. Schneider); Breakdown and Change of Private Interest Governments, Routledge (2011); Mobilizing on the Extreme Right: Germany, Italy, and the United States, Oxford University Press (2011) (with M. Caiani and D. della Porta). Andreas Wald, Dean of Research and Professor of Management and Strategy at the European Business School Paris and Visiting Professor at the EBS Business School in Germany. He holds a Masters degree in Political Science and Business Administration and a PhD from the University of Mannheim. Research interests: organizational networks, network analysis, innovation management, and project management.
- 31. Contributors xxv Relevant publications: (2009) A Micro-Level Approach to Organizational Information-Processing, Schmalenbach Business Review, 61 (July), 270– 289; (2007) Effects of ‘Mode 2’-Related Policy on the Research Process. The Case of Publicly Funded German Nanotechnology, Science Studies 20, 1: 26–51; (2007) Governance Reforms and Scientific Production. Evidence from German Astrophysics, in New Forms of Governance in Research Organizations – From Disciplinary Theories towards Interfaces and Integration (edited by D. Jansen), Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 213–232, with K. Franke und D. Jansen.
- 33. xxvii This book illustrates an important moment in social network analysis: the continued maturation of the field into a truly interdisciplinary sci- ence. The chapters represent the disciplines of anthropology, applied mathematics and statistics, communications research, demography, industrial engineering, management, political science, social psychology, and sociology. The chapters also represent the continued maturation of social network analysis into a truly “normal science,” in Thomas Kuhn’s (1996:10) memorable phrase. In 1977, Samuel Leinhardt edited a vol- ume titled Social Networks: A Developing Paradigm. The book had papers from social psychology, sociology, statistics and mathematics, and anthropology – the range of disciplines that, in 1977, was coalesc- ing into what Leinhardt called a developing paradigm – that is, a normal science.Leinhardt was right. In 1993, Norman Hummon and Kathleen Carley analyzed the contents of the first 12 years of the journal Social Networks (1978–1989). The pattern of citations, they said, indicated the development of a normal science: The field was incremental (people “attend to each other’s work”) and there were “young scientists willing to base their careers on work in this field,” suggesting that “social net- works as a specialty is in a ‘normal science’ phase rather than an early developmental phase” (pp. 103–104). One characteristic of a normal science is the easy, unpretentious use of qualitative and quantitative data and analysis. This is the salutary result of the mixed methods movement. I use the word “movement” deliber- ately. As of April 2012, there were 2,100 citations to the term “mixed methods” in the Social Science Citation Index. As shown in Figure 1, the first occurrence of the term dates from 1993, with more than 80 percent since 2008. There is a Journal of Mixed Methods Research (mmr.sage- pub.com), several textbooks on mixed methods research (Creswell and Foreword H. Russell Bernard
- 34. xxviii Foreword Plano Clark 2011; Greene 2007; Hesse-Biber 2010; Morse and Niehaus 2009), and a handbook of mixed methods research (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2010). What else could this possibly be if not a movement? First, here is what it is not: It is not a discovery of the value of com- bining qualitative and quantitative data and analysis in the same study. In fact, the most normal thing about normal science is the uncompli- cated, taken-for-granted mixing of qualitative and quantitative data and qualitative and quantitative analysis. That was the recipe for the con- duct of science followed by Galileo in his observations about the sur- face of the moon (Galileo 1610). It was the recipe adopted by Adolphe Quételet, John Stuart Mill, and the other founders of social science in the nineteenth century. It was the recipe followed in the twentieth century by Donald Campbell in psychology, Franz Boas in anthropology, Paul Lazarsfeld in sociology, and so on. And what exercise in all of science is more of a mixing of the quantitative and the qualitative than poring over the results of a factor analysis and talking with one’s colleagues – free- associating, really – about what to call a particular factor? There is a well-known countercurrent, of course, an on-again, off- again “war between the quals and the quants,” as Peter Rossi (1994) called it, marked by periods of rapprochement and vitriol. One of Franz Boas’s students, Paul Radin, accused his mentor of being natur- wissenschaftlich eingestelt or science minded – what a disgrace! – and warned that this would lead ethnologists to the quantification of culture (Radin 1933:10). In contrast, one of my teachers, Oscar Lewis, a gifted 1992 0 100 200 Citations to mixed methods 300 400 500 600 1997 2002 Year 2007 2012
- 35. Foreword xxix and prodigious ethnographer, observed with approval in 1953 that an increase in the use of quantification had been “one of the most signifi- cant developments in anthropological field work in recent years” (Lewis 1953:454). And in 1973, Sam Sieber argued – in the American Journal of Sociology, no less – for the integration of “qualitative fieldwork and survey research.” This “marriage of survey and fieldwork methodolo- gies,” said Sieber, would produce “a new style of research” (p. 1337). The new style that Sieber described in 1973 would be indistinguishable from what is called mixed methods today. The bottom line: Mixed methods is the natural order of science. It has never gone away, but it comes in and out of style in the social sciences. Which brings us to the current phenomenon, shown in Figure 1, a phe- nomenon that begs to be explained. In grappling with this same question, Johnson et al. (2007:117), in the first issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, offered that the movement is a “reaction to the polarization between quantitative and qualitative research.” I would take it a step further. It’s a reaction against the all-too-successful effort by some colleagues in the humanis- tic, interpretive tradition in social science to define the word “qualita- tive” as meaning not-quantitative and to force students of social science to choose epistemological sides – humanism or science, understanding or explanation, qualitative or quantitative. The current mixed methods, a-plague-on-both-your-houses movement makes no such pernicious claims on the lives of young scholars. It is the development of an intellec- tual safe space where the “qual–quant” war is ignored and the result is an explosion of creativity and collaborative research across disciplines – like that in this book. References Creswell, J. W. and V. L. Plano Clark . 2011. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Galileo, Galilei. 1610. The Starry Messenger. Venice. http://www.bard.edu/ admission/forms/pdfs/galileo.pdf (accessed April 9, 2012). Greene, J. C. 2007. Mixed Methods in SocialIinquiry. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Hesse-Biber, S. N. 2010. Mixed Methods Research: Merging Theory with Practice. New York: Guilford Press. Hummon, N. P. and K. Carley. 1993. “Social networks as normal science.” Social Networks 15:71–106. Johnson, R. B., A. J. Onwuegbuzie, and L. A. Turner. 2007. “Toward a defi- nition of mixed methods research. ” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1:112–133. Kuhn, T. S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: The University Press.
- 36. xxx Foreword Leinhardt, S. 1977. Social Networks: A Developing Paradigm. New York: Academic Press. Lewis, O. 1953. “Controls and experiments in field work.” Pp. 452–475 in Anthropology Today, edited by A. L. Kroeber et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Morse, J. M. and L. Niehaus . 2009. Mixed Method Design: Principles and Procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. Radin, P. 1933. The Method and Theory of Ethnology. New York: McGraw- Hill. Rossi, P. H. 1994. “The war between the quals and the quants: Is a lasting peace possible?” Pp. 23–36 in The Qualitative-Quantitative Debate: New Perspectives, edited by C. S. Reichardt and S. F. Rallis . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sieber, S. D. 1973. “The integration of fieldwork and survey methods.” American Journal of Sociology 73:1335–1359. Tashakkori, A. and C. Teddlie, eds. 2010. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
- 37. xxxi The idea for putting together this volume on the use of mixed methods in studying social networks emerged from discussions that we, Silvia Dominguez and Betina Hollstein, had in our time organizing the qual- itative and mixed method sessions for Sunbelt International Network Conferences. In fact, we are grateful to the International Network for Social Network Analysts (INSNA) for providing the context that brings together a wide international range of social network researchers from different traditions and disciplines. As is the way of such things, the project to produce this book turned out to be much larger and more complicated – and, of course, took much longer – than we or anyone could have foreseen. But we would have never embarked on this pro- ject if we had not received the encouragement of Janet W. Salaff and Julia Gluesing, who supported it from the very beginning. We are very thankful to the Berlin Graduate School of Social Sciences (BGSS) at the Humboldt University Berlin, especially the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at Humboldt University Berlin, Bernd Wegener, as well as the Faculty Advancement Grant from the Provost’s Office at Northeastern University for their financial and instrumental support in bringing the authors and us together for a conference at the European Academy in Berlin. The 2009 conference in Berlin allowed all contribu- tors to present their work, provide and receive feedback, fine-tune the organization of the manuscript, and advance the development of a coher- ent book. We also thank Markku Lonkila, who served as discussant at this occasion. We are especially thankful to Mark Granovetter and the two anony- mous reviewers for their encouragement and their helpful comments on the draft manuscript. We are thankful to Robert Dreesen and Elise M. Oranges from Cambridge University Press, who helped and provided assistance during production. We would also like to thank Mazhena Acknowledgments
- 38. xxxii Acknowledgments Trypucka, Liz Williams and Tammi Arford for help during the produc- tion of the book. We are grateful to all the individuals who participated in the qualitative and mixed methods sessions and who provided feed- back on many of the studies that are now chapters in the book. We owe a great debt of gratitude to the hundreds of respondents all over the globe who allowed us entry into their lives and provided us with the data for the studies in this volume. Finally, we also dedicate this book to our families. They lived with this project for a couple of years, reminding us of the need to balance work and family. We are thankful to Matias Ancelovi-Dominguez, Eric Brown, and Werner Rammert. Silvia Domínguez and Betina Hollstein
- 41. 3 1 Mixed Methods Social Networks Research: An Introduction Betina Hollstein Over the past 20 years there has been increasing recognition that focus- ing on either quantitative or qualitative research techniques alone leads researchers to miss important parts of a story. Researchers have found that better results are often achieved through combined approaches. In line with this observation, an increase in so-called mixed methods studies and research designs as well as in work providing overviews and system- atic accounts of such research has been witnessed in various disciplines and fields of study since the early 1990s (Morse 1991; Creswell 2003 (first ed. 1994); Greene and Caracelli 1997b; Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003; Axinn and Pearce 2006; Bryman 2006; Creswell and Plano Clark 2007; Bergman and Bryman 2008; Teddlie and Tashakkori 2008). Of course, the combination of different methodical approaches is anything but a recent phenomenon in field research – one might think of the Marienthal study (Jahoda, Zeisel, and Lazarsfeld 1933), the Hawthorne studies (Roethlisberger and Dickson 1939), as well as of several studies by the Chicago School. In many areas of research, the combined applica- tion of different methods goes back a long time without being explicitly referred to as a mixed methods design.1 However, the increased interest in and the systematic review of mixed methods designs and the results they yield are indeed new aspects in this development. This interest in mixed methods designs can probably be explained in that their bringing together the strengths of both quantitative and qual- itative strategies holds the promise of compensating for the respective weaknesses of both approaches. In view of the usually small sample 1 Articles discussing the combination and integration of methods have been published in such journals as Field Methods and International Journal of Social Research Methodology right from the outset. I am grateful to Johannes Huinink and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
- 42. 4 Bettina Hollstein sizes, so-called qualitative (or interpretive, less standardized) research faces criticism for an allegedly arbitrary selection of samples and a lack of representativity, which in turn is said to raise questions as to the generalizability of results and to cause difficulties in the systematic comparison of cases and testing of causal models. Skepticism toward so-called quantitative (or quantifying, standardized) research, on the other hand, is mainly voiced with respect to its apparent neglect of the particular social context in which actors attribute meaning to their actions and to its potentially lower sensitivity to new, unexplored, or marginal social phenomena and developments. Mixed methods designs attempt at engaging quantitative and qualitative research strategies in an intelligent dialogue that benefits both sides. In their definition of mixed methods, Johnson and Onwuegbuzie aptly describe the aim and motivation underlying the mixed method approach: “Mixed methods research is the type of research in which a researcher or team of research- ers combines elements of qualitative and quantitative approaches (e.g., use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data collection, analysis, inference techniques) for the purpose of breadth and depth of under- standing and corroboration” (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2007:123; emphasis added by BH). Upon close inspection, a wide range of different approaches fall within this definition. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie asked 21 researchers for their definition of mixed methods and received 19 different responses. It seems safe to say that their definition represents the smallest common denominator of a variety of different definitions used to describe mixed methods. The various definitions offered by Johnson and Onwuegbuzie’s respondents, which give a quite accurate picture of the definitions also found in the literature, can be distinguished as to what precisely is com- bined (methods, methodologies, or types of research), at what stages of the research process methods are combined (formulation of the research question, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or infer- ence), and to what end methods are combined (e.g., to achieve breadth or for corroboration or triangulation). In any case, when we speak of combining approaches, we are referring to more than a simple process of mere addition. As Creswell et al. put it, “A mixed methods study involves the collection or analysis of both quantitative and/or qualita- tive data in a single study in which the data are collected concurrently or sequentially, are given a priority, and involve the integration of the data at one or more stages in the process” (Creswell2003:212; emphasis added by BH). Instead of simple addition, the task is to systematically relate quantitative and qualitative strategies or data at at least one stage of the research process. Due to this systematic integration of qualitative and quantitative strategies, mixed methods designs create special oppor- tunities for improving data quality, thereby increasing the significance
- 43. An Introduction 5 of results (Greene, Caracelli, and Graham 1989; Tashakkori and Teddlie 2003; Axinn and Pearce 2006; Bryman 2006). In the discussion to come, we speak of mixed methods studies when at least three conditions are met: (1) First, the studies make use of qualitative as well as quantitative data. This does not necessarily mean that both qualitative and quantitative data must actually be collected. Making use of the two types of data may also take the form of data conversion; for instance, qualitative data are collected and converted into quantitative data for analysis. (2) Second, both qualitative and quantitative strategies of data analysis are applied. (3) And, finally, at at least one stage of the research process, there must be some form of integration of either data, or of data analysis or of results (meta- inference). In reviewing network research, we notice that there has been no sys- tematic consideration of mixed methods studies so far, neither with regard to possible research designs nor their potential for the study of social networks. If we look at the relevant manuals and handbooks in the field, it is quite obvious that the methodical repertoire of cur- rent social network analysis for the most part consists of sophisticated, highly standardized, and formalized methods of analysis (cf. Wasserman and Faust 1994; Degenne and Forsé 1999; Scott 2000; Carrington et al. 2005; Scott and Carrington 2011).2 Although there is a significant num- ber of network studies that combine qualitative and quantitative meth- ods of data collection and analysis (e.g., Wellman et al. 1988; Provan and Milward 1995; McLean 1998; Diani and McAdam 2003; Smith 2005; Small 2009), we still lack a compendium that provides a system- atic account of the field. The present volume contributes to this end as it is the first systematic overview on the use of mixed methods for investi- gating social networks. We will present different ways of mixing qualitative and quanti- tative strategies and discuss the challenges and benefits for research on social networks. The chapters assembled in this book illustrate that the application of such designs can improve the quality of data and enhance the explanatory power and generalizability of results. Moreover, with respect to social network research, mixed meth- ods studies promise to provide empirically sound contributions to 2 The application of qualitative research methods in network studies is mentioned only with respect to the collection of relational data (such as interviews, observations, or archival records; Wasserman and Faust 2005). Mixed methods designs for data collec- tion are not described in detail, and qualitative methods and mixed methods designs for analyzing network data are not considered. For the first English language review on qualitative network research, cf. Hollstein (2011).
- 44. 6 Bettina Hollstein current issues, especially concerning the processes, dynamics, and consequences of social networks. We will take a closer look at these issues later on. Before we do so, we will first give a brief overview of the objects, questions, and approaches of network research. We must also clarify what the terms “quantita- tive,” “qualitative,” and “mixed methods” actually mean in the context of social networks. The Concept of Social Network According to J. Clyde Mitchell’s classic definition, networks can be described as a “specific set of linkages between a defined set of social actors” (Mitchell 1969:2), whereby both the linkages and the social actors can refer to quite different social entities. Actors can be orga- nizations, political actors, households, families, or individuals. The linkages or relationships may, for instance, refer to interactions or rela- tions defined by a specific content, such as power relations, information exchange, or emotional proximity.3 Social networks are typically the subject matter of anthropology and sociology, of communication studies as well as political science, but they also play an increasingly promi- nent role in computer science, economics, history, and medical science. Research topics range from communication networks, the formation of subcultures, and social movements to networks of local power elites, informal networks within and between organizations, and on to per- sonal or private networks, including virtual and semantic networks (cf. Scott 2000; Scott and Carrington 2011). The particular attractiveness of the network concept lies in the fact that it focuses attention on the “totality” of social relations and their social context and hence on the “embeddedness” of social action (Granovetter 1985). Going beyond single relationships, network research investigates the relations between the various relationships of a network (e.g., the formation of clusters or cliques) and the influ- ence of structural properties of networks and social relations on social integration. For instance, information flow is a lot faster and norms are more effectively established in dense networks where a large number 3 Even though the linkages between actors are defined by their content, the network concept as such rather refers to the formal structure of those social relations, e.g., the size of a network, the frequency of interactions between its members (alteri), or its density (the number of actual as compared to potential relationships between alteri). Therefore, network concepts are often combined with concepts aimed at the functions or the content of relationships (e.g., concepts capturing social support or social capital; cf. Marsden 1990, 2011).
- 45. An Introduction 7 of people are acquainted with one another than in networks marked by a low density of relationships. At the individual level, dense net- works provide more social support but also exert more social control (Coleman 1990). Another well-known structural property of networks are so-called “structural holes” (Burt 1992). Occupying such struc- tural holes gives privileged access to information, power, and influence (Padgett and Ansell 1993). Due to its relational perspective, the network concept integrates both the societal micro- and macro-levels and offers a specific starting point for tracing the mechanisms of social integration as well as the condi- tions and implications of social change. Moreno’s sociometric studies in the 1930s and American community studies in the 1940s were early antecedents of contemporary network research in the social sciences. The term “social network” was first introduced in the 1950s by British cultural anthropologists who investigated small-scale social settings at the time, such as rural communities, neighborhoods, and subcultural environments (Barnes 1954; Bott 1957; Mitchell 1969). However, it was not until the 1970s that network analysis was established in the social sciences as a distinct empirical paradigm for analyzing systems of social relationships, parallel to the development of its mathematical foundations (cf. Freeman 2004; Knox et al. 2006; Carrington, this volume). Within the scope of this paradigm – known as “structural network analysis” – an extensive set of methodical instruments has been developed since then. Structural network analysis is characterized by the use of highly differentiated standardized methods of data col- lection (e.g., established name generators like Burt generator, position generator, resource generator, etc.), various measures of network struc- tures (e.g., density and centrality measures), as well as sophisticated analytical procedures and calculation models, comprising block mod- els, random graph models, and as of recently also advanced models for the analysis of longitudinal data (cf. Wasserman and Faust 1994; Carrington et al. 2005; Scott and Carrington 2011; Snijders 2011). As Peter J. Carrington (this volume) points out, precisely this “mathema- tization of social network analysis” can be assumed to have played a key role in rendering the network concept compatible across a wide range of academic disciplines, thus contributing to its remarkably widespread use. In spite of the obvious strengths and benefits of the network approach, the structuralist paradigm that has dominated it has also attracted crit- icism since the early 1990s: Critics claim that the significance of action has been overlooked due to this preoccupation with structure. Such crit- icism is mainly directed against approaches that are either committed to “structural determinism” (Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994) or involve
- 46. 8 Bettina Hollstein utilitarian models of action (“structural instrumentalism”; Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994).4 According to these critics the challenge of network research is to link the structural level with the actors involved. This would particularly concern the systematic integration of their capacity to act and actively shape their (social) environment as well as their reference to norms, symbols, and cultural practices (Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994; Mizruchi 1994; Schweizer 1996; Emirbayer 1997). As Dorothea Jansen (1999) put it, “A significant theoretical problem [of network research; BH] lies in the sparsely reflected relation between concrete networks and interactions, on the one hand, and subjective attributions of meaning, norms, and institutions, [as well as] cultures and symbolic worlds, on the other. In their dispute with structural functionalism of the Parsonian kind, network researchers have possibly thrown out the baby with the bathwater in claiming absolute priority for concrete structures of inter- action vis-à-vis norms and symbolic worlds of any kind” (p. 258 f; trans- lated from German by BH). However, in recent network research, work has been done that seeks to conceptually integrate agency and to take cultural symbols and norms into account. Research from the quarters of phenomenological network theory comes to mind (White 1992; Mische 2003; Gibson 2005; Yeung 2005).5 As we will show, mixed methods studies can provide stimulating contributions in this respect as well. What Do We Mean by “Mixed Methods” in Social Network Research? Let us now turn to the question of how network research can be posi- tioned in relation to both quantitative and qualitative methods and what 4 Emirbayer and Goodwin (1994) differentiate, three theoretical positions with respect to how social structure, culture and agency are conceptualized in network research: “The first of these implicit models, that of structuralist determinism, neglects alto- gether the potential causal role of actor’s beliefs, values, and normative commitments – or, more generally, of the significance of cultural and political discourses in history. It neglects as well those historical configurations of action that shape and transform pregiven social structures in the first place. A second and more satisfactory – but still deeply problematic – approach is that of structural instrumentalism. Studies within this perspective accept the prominent role of social actors in history, but ultimatively conceptualize their activity in narrowly utility-maximizing and instrumental forms. And finally, the most sophisticated network perspective on social change, which we term structuralist constructivism, thematizes provocatively certain historical pro- cesses of identity conversion and ‘robust action.’ It is the most successful of all of these approaches in adequately conceptualizing human agency and the potentially trans- formative impact of cultural idioms and normative commitments on social action” (Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994:1425f.; emphasis in the original). 5 Other approaches pointing in this direction are symbolic interactionism (Fine and Klineman 1983), Bourdieu’s theory of practice, Latour’s actor-network theory (cf. Knox et al. 2006) and Luhmann’s theory of social systems (cf. Fuhse and Mützel 2010).
- 47. An Introduction 9 “mixed methods” means precisely in social network research. Clearly positioning network research in the spectrum of empirical methods is no easy task if we rely on the common systems for the classification of meth- odology offered in the literature. Or, in the words of Peter J. Carrington, “Social network analysis itself is neither quantitative nor qualitative, nor a combination of the two. Rather, it is structural”6 (this volume; similarly Bellotti 2010). Like qualitative methods, network research places special emphasis on the contextuality or “embeddedness” of social action. Yet unlike qualitative methods, network research employs established stan- dardized instruments to this end, and network structures are typically described in terms of measured values and numbers, thus in a formal- ized or quantified manner. Nevertheless, the concept of representativity usually cannot be applied to network studies – at least not without some restrictions. (For sociocentric or whole networks, it is impossible to determine the statistical population. And if egocentric7 network data are collected within the scope of representative samples, representative con- clusions can only be drawn about the attributes of ego but not about the relations existing with or between the alteri; cf. Belotti 2010). That, of course, rules out the use of inferential statistics, and reliable statements on the prevalence of networks and network structures can be made only to a limited extent. We also have to consider that we are often dealing with relatively small sample sizes, especially when investigating whole networks. In the following we distinguish quantitative and qualitative network data and quantitative and qualitative strategies of network analysis. In line with a commonly made distinction, we understand by quantita- tive data numerical data and by qualitative data data in text form (cf. Bernard 1994). Accordingly, what we call quantitative network data refers to all data describing relations, interactions, and structures of networks in formal terms using numbers (e.g., the number of relation- ships between the members of a network). We speak of qualitative net- work data when aspects of networks are described in text form (e.g., when actors explain the strategies of action adopted vis-à-vis other members of a network). 6 Or in the words of an anonymous reviewer, “There is an argument that social network analysis, as a method of formal analysis, is not quantitative but uses numbers in order to grasp the quality of social relationships. It is, at the very least, different from obvi- ous quantitative approaches that focus on attributes rather than relations.” 7 Whole (sociocentric), complete, or “entire” networks – e.g., entire communities – are investigated less often. If so, the respondents can, for instance, be selected by means of snowball sampling (on sampling strategies, cf. Frank 2011). In contrast, so-called “ego- centered” (egocentric) networks refer to the networks of individual actors who are in most cases the only source of information about their networks (cf. Carrington, this volume; Wald, this volume). The present volume assembles studies on ego-centered as well as on whole networks.
- 48. 10 Bettina Hollstein Quantitative strategies of analysis are defined as strategies of data analysis to describe in quantitative terms empirical regularities, the fre- quency and prevalence of social phenomena, as well as causal mech- anisms and processes. The basic strategies of data analysis consist of descriptive measures, statistical methods, and path or causal mod- els. More recently, we are also observing an increasing trend toward computer simulations. In network research, quantitative methods are geared toward mathematical descriptions and analyses of interactions, relations, and network structures. Measured values and numbers, for instance, are density and centrality measures or the triad census (e.g., Gluesing, Riopelle, and Danowski, this volume). More sophisticated analyses apply formal models and statistical procedures, such as block model analysis, exponential random graph modeling, or regression anal- ysis (cf. Wasserman and Faust 1994; Carrington et al. 2005; Scott and Carrington 2011). In this sense, we consider most of the methods used in social network analysis to be “quantitative.” Qualitative analysis refers to all those methods in empirical social research that aim at gaining an understanding of meaning and its frames of reference (cf. Hollstein 2011). Qualitative data will generally come as text and are meant to provide insight into contexts of action as well as systems of meaning. If no such data are readily available, researchers will turn to open-ended methods of data collection, such as interviewing or unstructured observation methods, and interpre- tive methods of data analysis. Interpretive strategies of data analysis allow one to reconstruct cultural practices and interaction patterns. Moreover, they are especially well suited for capturing the actors’ own systems of relevance, perceptions, interpretations, and action orienta- tions. With respect to network research, qualitative methods are there- fore most appropriate for investigating network practices and network perceptions and interpretations (cf. Hollstein 2011). In principle, per- ceptions, attributions of meaning, and systems of relevance can also be investigated with standardized methods (e.g., Maya-Jariego and Dominguez; Gluesing et al., this volume). An open, inductive approach, however, is indicated in cases where the research question is of a more exploratory nature. The same holds true for settings where we expect great variations in individual meanings and/or systems of relevance (cf. Wald, this volume). As we now have established a more precise understanding of what is meant by mixed methods, qualitative and quantitative data, and quali- tative and quantitative strategies of analysis in network research, we can proceed to define more precisely mixed methods in network research. We will speak of mixed methods network studies when three conditions are satisfied:
- 49. An Introduction 11 The studies are based on both • quantitative, numerical network data – that is, data describing nodes and relations – and qualita- tive textual data. As mentioned earlier, this does not imply that both types of data actually must be collected; data may also be converted from one type into another (e.g., Verd and Lozares, this volume). In analyzing relations and networks, both • quantitative, mathematical strategies and qualitative, interpretive strategies are used. While the former are tailored toward analyzing the structural dimensions of relationships and networks, the latter are designed to capture practices, meanings, and the social con- texts of relationships and networks. And finally, at at least one stage of the research process, the • data or strategies of analysis must be integrated in some form, at either the stage of data collection, data analysis, or interpreta- tion of results (meta-inference). When we speak of integration in the following, we refer to systematically relating or linking qual- itative and quantitative data or strategies of analysis.8 Such inte- gration is a key element in mixed methods studies. Were it not for this integrative component, these studies would be no more than the mere addition of qualitative and quantitative analyses. Mixed Methods Research Designs We now turn our attention to the ways in which qualitative and quan- titative data and strategies can be integrated. Relating qualitative and quantitative data and analyses can take very different shapes depending on the research in question (Creswell et al. 2003; Greene and Caracelli 1997; Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004; Morgan 1998; Morse 1991, 2003). For instance, studies may differ in the number of strands or phases included (monostrand, multistrand). A strand of a research design is a phase of a study that comprises three main stages (steps, com- ponents): the conceptualization stage, the experiential stage (methodo- logical/ analytical), and the inferential stage (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2009:288). Most mixed methods designs are “multistrand designs” that consist of a complete quantitative cycle (including quantitative data col- lection, quantitative data analysis, and inference) and a complete qual- itative cycle accordingly. Yet there are differences in implementation. For instance, the designs may differ in terms of chronological order, as 8 In contrast, we may also speak of “combining” data or strategies of analysis in a broader sense to also include merely additive approaches.
- 50. 12 Bettina Hollstein quantitative and qualitative strands of a study can be employed either simultaneously or consecutively. Apart from simultaneous or consec- utive implementation, we also observe conversion as a third mode in which either qualitative data are transformed or converted into quan- titative data, or vice versa (Teddlie and Tashakkori 2006; Tashakkori andTeddlie 2009). When considering implementation, the sampling methods employed in mixed method research must also be taken into account: Are the samples identical; do they overlap – for instance is one a subset of the other – or are the sample compositions completely dif- ferent (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2009; cf. Bernardi et al., this volume)? Whatever the case may be, an especially important aspect is at what stages and at how many different stages in the research process the inte- gration of approaches takes place: during conceptualization, data col- lection, data analysis, and the interpretation of data (inferential stage). In some studies, the qualitative and quantitative strands of the research are given equal importance; in other cases, one strand has priority over the other. Finally, depending on the underlying logic guiding research, some studies place emphasis on exploratory forms of inquiry while oth- ers focus on the testing of hypotheses. Drawing on the classifications suggested by Teddlie and Tashakkori (2006), Tashakkori and Teddlie (2009), Creswell et al. (2003), Creswell and Plano Clark (2007), and Greene et al. (1989), we differentiate between five families of mixed methods designs9 : sequential designs (exploratory, explanatory), parallel designs, fully integrated designs, embedded designs, and conversion designs. This classification distin- guishes designs mainly along the following dimensions: type of imple- mentation process, stage of integration, and priority of one approach. It also takes into consideration the logic guiding the research (exploratory or explanatory sequential design) and the number of strands (monos- trand conversion design or multistrand conversion design). All five of these families of designs and subtypes are represented in this volume. Sequential Designs Sequential designs are multistrand designs. The characteristic feature of sequential designs is the consecutive use of quantitative and qualita- tive strands. Conclusions drawn based on the results of the first strand determine the questions, data collection, and analysis of the next strand (Teddlie and Tashakkori 2006:21). According to the underlying rationale of 9 A note is in order here that these design families are neither exhaustive nor completely non-overlapping. It has frequently been pointed out that developing an exhaus- tive typology of mixed methods designs is impossible (e.g., Teddlie and Tashakkori 2006).
- 51. An Introduction 13 research, we distinguish between “sequential exploratory” and “sequential explanatory” designs (Creswell et al. 2003). A sequential exploratory design starts with a qualitative phase, which is then followed by a quantitative phase. In many studies, the qualitative part figures only as a prestudy to the actual quantitative research, for instance, if important issues and events or relevant actors and forms of cooperation have to be identified first, such as in investigations of polit- ical networks or cooperative research networks (cf. Baumgarten and Lahusen 2006; Wald, this volume). The primary purpose of the quali- tative pretest is to support the development of instruments for the main (quantitative) study with the purpose of enhancing the validity of the collected data. Thorough qualitative prestudies or pretests are particu- larly advisable in advance of any standardized research into sociocentric networks. Since such studies typically require a massive effort in terms of data collection, a good knowledge of the field is a precondition for obtaining meaningful results (Baumgarten and Lahusen 2006). The qualitative study, however, can also represent an independent ele- ment of inquiry in its own right. In that case, it may be used to explore new or yet unexplored types of networks and network practices, for instance, regarding networks of particular ethnic groups (Smith 2005), migrants (Menjivar 2000), or social movements (Mische 2008). Additional quan- titative strands will then help to identify the prevalence of such types of networks and network practices. It can also help to obtain a more com- prehensive picture of the conditions (e.g., institutional settings) under which such patterns have effects (Mische 2003, 2008; Smith 2005). Yet another option is to use a simulation to analyze network consequences. For instance, based on an ethnographic study, Rogers and Menjivar (this volume) use agent-based modeling to investigate the long-term develop- ment of social networks of Salvadorian migrants living in San Francisco. In this case, the qualitative analysis serves as input to create a computa- tional model. A sequential explanatory design, in contrast, starts with the collec- tion and analysis of quantitative data, which is then followed by a qual- itative strand. In some cases, the qualitative inquiry is meant to deepen and further elucidate the results obtained by the quantitative analy- sis (Bearman and Parigi 200410 ). The quantitative strand can also lay the groundwork for selecting and locating cases to be examined more closely by qualitative means (so-called “mapping”; e.g., McLean 1998; Wong and Salaff 1998; Hollstein 2002). Cases can then be selected, for 10 For instance, in a qualitative follow-up study to the General Social Survey, Bearman and Parigi (2004) examine what precisely the GSS respondents had in mind when declaring that they would talk to other people about “important matters” (Burt name generator question).
- 52. 14 Bettina Hollstein instance, using multidimensional scaling (McLean 1998) or based on the network structure (Maya-Jariego and Dominguez, this volume). Case selection can be guided by quite different criteria: Sometimes emphasis is placed on extreme cases or “outliers;” at other times it is more about identifying particularly typical cases. In their analysis of migrant accul- turation, Maya-Jariego and Dominguez identify host individuals by a process of screening based on the structure of personal networks. The individuals thus selected are then studied from an ethnographic perspec- tive for their relationships to migrants, attitudes, and the value systems they subscribe to. On the whole, sequential designs consisting of two consecutive stud- ies are generally a little less complex and easier to do than parallel designs, which we will discuss later. This is why Teddlie and Tashakkori (2006) recommend sequential designs to researchers who are just begin- ning to work with mixed methods designs. A disadvantage, however, is that because they require performing one step after another, sequential designs tend to be more time and thus cost intensive compared to paral- lel designs (Bernardi et al., this volume). Parallel Designs Parallel designs are multistrand designs in which quantitative and qual- itative strands are employed more or less simultaneously. This does not mean that the individual stages (data collection and data analysis) of the qualitative and quantitative strands necessarily have to be conducted at the same time; they can take place at different points in time just as well. In contrast to sequential designs, parallel designs allow for data to be collected synchronously since the data collected for one strand do not rely on the results of the other strand. For precisely this reason, it seems more appropriate to speak of “parallel” instead of “concurrent” design (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2009). Both parts are usually also analyzed sep- arately. Only once the results from the individual strands of analysis are available are meta-inferences made. Parallel designs are a suitable means of pursuing both exploratory and confirmatory research questions. They are especially useful for triangulating data and checking for complemen- tarity, that is, to gain a more complex and complete picture of the subject matter. Parallel designs with special emphasis on the triangulation of data are aimed at validating and at the same time corroborating results (cf. the methodological discussion by Wald, this volume, and the empir- ical study by Gluesing et al., this volume). Parallel designs can also be employed to increase the explanatory power as well as the generalizabil- ity of results by generating a broad, complex, and – to the greatest pos- sible degree – comprehensive understanding of social phenomena. Such an approach thus looks for complementarity rather than convergence.
- 53. An Introduction 15 Empirical examples in this line of research are the longitudinal study by Bidart and Lavenu (2005) on changes in the networks of young adults and the study by Bernardi et al. (this volume) on the influence of social networks on family formation. A theoretically and empirically instruc- tive case of a so-called multilevel parallel design11 is Häussling’s study (this volume) on the restructuring of a car manufacturer’s sales depart- ment. He analyzes different levels of interaction: semantic contexts and networks of interaction as well as individual action orientations. He relates all of these levels and shows that the implementation of knowl- edge management systems fails because it is systematically undermined by the employees’ informal network relationships. Compared to sequential designs, parallel designs are less time consum- ing. The obvious drawback of parallel designs, however, is that studying the same phenomenon by applying two different approaches simulta- neously yet separately requires considerable expertise. In this light, it comes as no surprise that most of the empirical contributions to this volume are collaborations between authors with different methodical backgrounds. Teddlie and Tashakkori (2006:21) direct attention to yet another kind of problem in this respect. The novice or the researcher working alone may face particular problems when the results of the qualitative and quantitative analyses yield discrepant results and the researcher is challenged to interpret or resolve these inconsistencies to draw inferences at the meta-level. Fully Integrated Design The fully integrated mixed design is a specific kind of multistrand parallel design or, in Teddlie and Tashakkori (2006:23) words, “the ‘Full Monty’ of mixed methods designs”. This is the variant that most closely meshes and integrates qualitative with quantitative approaches. The different approaches are integrated interactively and dynamically along all stages of the research process. In this way, the fully integrated design man- ages to combine the benefits of both the parallel and sequential designs, which makes it a potentially especially fruitful endeavor. Because of its complexity, however, it at the same time places the greatest demands on the researcher in terms of coordinating the various elements across the whole process. This type of design is illustrated by Avenarius and Johnson’s study (this volume) on the acceptance of newly established legal institutions in rural China. The study not only combines survey and ethnographic data but manages to do so in such a way that the qual- itative and quantitative approaches inform one another at several points 11 In so-called multilevel designs (Tashakkori and Teddlie 2009), the qualitative and quantitative strands address different levels of analysis.
- 54. 16 Bettina Hollstein in the research process: at the points of sampling and collecting data, and in the course of analyzing and interpreting the findings. The study is also an instructive illustration of the fact that mixed methods studies are often initially not planned as such. At times it is seemingly contradic- tory phenomena, not clearly explicable observations, or the open ques- tions of a previous study that motivate researchers to consider new paths in collecting and analyzing data involving different and complementary methods. Embedded Design In principle, the qualitative and quantitative parts can be given equal weight in the multistrand designs considered so far (both in terms of their significance for the research project and regarding the share of research activities devoted to the two strands). Of course, one approach may also be dominant or have priority over the other. Because this is an important aspect in planning the research process and the allocation of resources, we have included the “embedded design” (Creswell and Plano Clark 2007) in our collection. In the case of an embedded design, either the qualitative or the quantitative strand constitutes only a small part of the study, which may be conducted in parallel with, subsequent to, or as a prestudy to the major part of the research. Embedded designs are also referred to as nested designs (Creswell 2003). An example of a network study of this kind is the contribution by Gluesing et al. (this volume) on the patterns of communication and the effectiveness of innovation net- works in multinational corporations. Apart from tens of thousands of e-mails, the data collection in this study also included in-depth interviews as well as participant observation of interactions between team members (who were “shadowed” by the researchers for days). The observational data serve to validate the quantitative information and help classify and comprehend the relevance of the e-mail communication. The analysis of the different types of data reveals surprising differences in e-mail use between Americans and Germans. (The former handle many things by e-mail even if the addressee is located in the office next door while in that particular case Germans prefer face-to-face communication.) The chapter demonstrates how ethnographic methods provide both relevant content and context that can be incorporated into IT-based techniques for data mining. An advantage of embedded designs is that they are often less costly than designs in which the qualitative and quantitative parts are given equal weight in terms of their significance for the research project and also regarding the share of research activities devoted to the two strands. The cost advantage results from the fact that the embedded part of the research is usually applied to objects and areas with well-defined
- 55. Another Random Document on Scribd Without Any Related Topics
- 56. his accounts from about 1539 to his death, but has a most interesting entry from which we gather that in 1540 Lotto completed the portraits of Martin Luther and his wife. These portraits could not have been painted from life; they were presumably executed from some contemporary engraving. See Lorenzo Lotto, by Bernard Berenson (London, 1901). LOTTO (Ital. for “lot”), a gambling game usually called Keno in America, played by any number of persons upon large boards or cards, each of which is divided into three horizontal rows of nine spaces, four spaces in each row being left blank and the other five marked with numbers up to 90. Each card is designated by a general number. The cards usually lie on the gambling-table, and a player may buy from the bank as many as he cares to use, each card being registered or pegged on an exposed table as soon as bought. Ninety small ivory markers, generally balls flattened on one side, numbered from 1 to 90, are placed in a bag and shaken out one by one, or, more usually, in a so-called keno-goose, a kind of urn with a spout through which the balls are allowed to roll by means of a spring. When a number falls out, the banker, or keno-roller, calls it out distinctly, and each player upon whose card that number occurs places a mark over it. This is repeated until one player has all the numbers in one row of his card covered, upon which he calls out
- 57. “Keno!” and wins all the money staked excepting a percentage to the bank. LOTUS, a popular name applied to several plants. The lotus fruits of the Greeks belonged to Zizyphus Lotus, a bush native in south Europe with fruits as large as sloes, containing a mealy substance which can be used for making bread and also a fermented drink. In ancient times the fruits were an important article of food among the poor; whence “lotophagi” or lotus-eaters. Zizyphus is a member of the natural order Rhamnaceae to which belongs the British buckthorn. The Egyptian lotus was a water-lily, Nymphaea Lotus; as also is the sacred lotus of the Hindus, Nelumbium speciosum. The lotus tree, known to the Romans as the Libyan lotus, and planted by them for shade, was probably Celtis australis, the nettle-tree (q.v.), a southern European tree, a native of the elm family, with fruits like small cherries, which are first red and then black. Lotus of botanists is a genus of the pea-family (Leguminosae), containing a large number of species of herbs and undershrubs widely distributed in the temperate regions of the old world. It is represented in Britain by L. corniculatus, bird’s foot trefoil, a low- growing herb, common in pastures and waste places, with clusters of small bright yellow pea-like flowers, which are often streaked with crimson; the popular name is derived from the pods which when ripe spread like the toes of a bird’s foot.
- 58. LOTUS-EATERS (Gr. Λωτοφάγοι), a Libyan tribe known to the Greeks as early as the time of Homer. Herodotus (iv. 177) describes their country as in the Libyan district bordering on the Syrtes, and says that a caravan route led from it to Egypt. Victor Bérard identifies it with the modern Jerba. When Odysseus reached the country of the Lotophagi, many of his sailors after eating the lotus lost all wish to return home. Both Greeks and Romans used the expression “to eat the lotus” to denote forgetfulness (cf. Tennyson’s poem “The Lotus-Eaters”). There has been considerable discussion as to the identification of the Homeric lotus. Some have held that it is a prickly shrub, Zizyphus Lotus, which bears a sweet-tasting fruit, and still grows in the old home of the Lotophagi. It is eaten by the natives, who also make a kind of wine from the juice. P. Champault (Phéniciens et Grecs en Italie d’après l’Odyssée, p. 400, note 2), however, maintains that the lotus was a date; Victor Bérard (Les Phéniciens et l’Odyssée, 1902-1903, ii. 102) is doubtful, but contends that it was certainly a tree-fruit. If either of these be correct, then the lotus of Od. iv. 603-604 is quite a different plant, a kind of clover. Now Strabo (xvii. 829a) calls the lotus πόαν τινὰ καὶ ῥίζαν. Putting these two references together with Sulpicius Severus, Dialogi i. 4. 4, R. M. Henry suggests that
- 59. the Homeric lotus was really the πόα of Strabo, i.e. a kind of clover (Classical Review, December 1906, p. 435). LOTZE, RUDOLF HERMANN (1817-1881), German philosopher, was born in Bautzen on the 21st of May 1817, the son of a physician. He received his education in the gymnasium of Zittau under teachers who inspired him with an enduring love of the classical authors, as we see from his translation of the Antigone of Sophocles into Latin verse, published when he had reached middle life. He went to the university of Leipzig as a student of philosophy and natural sciences, but entered officially as a student of medicine. He was then only seventeen. It appears that thus early Lotze’s studies were governed by two distinct interests. The first was scientific, based upon mathematical and physical studies under the guidance of E. H. Weber, W. Volckmann and G. T. Fechner. The other was his aesthetical and artistic interest, which was developed under the care of C. H. Weisse. To the former he owes his appreciation of exact investigation and a complete knowledge of the aims of science, to the latter an equal admiration for the great circle of ideas which had been diffused by the teaching of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel. Each of these influences, which early in life must have been familiar to him, tempered and modified the other. The true method of science which he possessed forced him to condemn as useless the entire form which Schelling’s and Hegel’s expositions had adopted,
- 60. especially the dialectic method of the latter, whilst his love of art and beauty, and his appreciation of moral purposes, revealed to him the existence of a trans-phenomenal world of values into which no exact science could penetrate. It is evident how this initial position at once defined to him the tasks which philosophy had to perform. First there were the natural sciences, themselves only just emerging from a confused conception of their true method; especially those which studied the borderland of physical and mental phenomena, the medical sciences; and pre-eminently that science which has since become so popular, the science of biology. Lotze’s first essay was his dissertation De futurae biologiae principibus philosophicis, with which he gained (1838) the degree of doctor of medicine, after having only four months previously got the degree of doctor of philosophy. Then, secondly, there arose the question whether the methods of exact science sufficed to explain the connexion of phenomena, or whether for the explanation of this the thinking mind was forced to resort to some hypothesis not immediately verifiable by observation, but dictated by higher aspirations and interests. And, if to satisfy these we were forced to maintain the existence of a world of moral standards, it was, thirdly, necessary to form some opinion as to the relation of these moral standards of value to the forms and facts of phenomenal existence. These different tasks, which philosophy had to fulfil, mark pretty accurately the aims of Lotze’s writings, and the order in which they were published. He laid the foundation of his philosophical system very early in his Metaphysik (Leipzig, 1841) and his Logik (1843), short books published while he was still a junior lecturer at Leipzig, from which university he migrated to Göttingen, succeeding Herbart in the chair of philosophy. But it was only during the last decade of his life that he ventured, with much hesitation, to present his ideas
- 61. in a systematic and final form. The two books mentioned remained unnoticed by the reading public, and Lotze first became known to a larger circle through a series of works which aimed at establishing in the study of the physical and mental phenomena of the human organism in its normal and diseased states the same general principles which had been adopted in the investigation of inorganic phenomena. These works were his Allgemeine Pathologie und Therapie als mechanische Naturwissenschaften (Leipzig, 1842, 2nd ed., 1848), the articles “Lebenskraft” (1843) and “Seele und Seelenleben” (1846) in Rud. Wagner’s Handwörterbuch der Physiologie, his Allgemeine Physiologie des Körperlichen Lebens (Leipzig, 1851), and his Medizinische Psychologie oder Physiologie der Seele (Leipzig, 1852). When Lotze published these works, medical science was still much under the influence of Schelling’s philosophy of nature. The mechanical laws, to which external things were subject, were conceived as being valid only in the inorganic world; in the organic and mental worlds these mechanical laws were conceived as being disturbed or overridden by other powers, such as the influence of final causes, the existence of types, the work of vital and mental forces. This confusion Lotze, who had been trained in the school of mathematical reasoning, tried to dispel. The laws which govern particles of matter in the inorganic world govern them likewise if they are joined into an organism. A phenomenon a, if followed by b in the one case, is followed by the same b also in the other case. Final causes, vital and mental forces, the soul itself can, if they act at all, only act through the inexorable mechanism of natural laws. As we therefore have only to do with the study of existing complexes of material and spiritual phenomena, the changes in these must be explained in science by the rule of mechanical laws, such as obtain
- 62. everywhere in the world, and only by such. One of the results of these investigations was to extend the meaning of the word mechanism, and comprise under it all laws which obtain in the phenomenal world, not excepting the phenomena of life and mind. Mechanism was the unalterable connexion of every phenomenon a with other phenomena b, c, d, either as following or preceding it; mechanism was the inexorable form into which the events of this world are cast, and by which they are connected. The object of those writings was to establish the all-pervading rule of mechanism. But the mechanical view of nature is not identical with the materialistic. In the last of the above-mentioned works the question is discussed at great length how we have to consider mind, and the relation between mind and body; the answer is—we have to consider mind as an immaterial principle, its action, however, on the body and vice versa as purely mechanical, indicated by the fixed laws of a psycho-physical mechanism. These doctrines of Lotze— though pronounced with the distinct and reiterated reserve that they did not contain a solution of the philosophical question regarding the nature, origin, or deeper meaning of this all-pervading mechanism, neither an explanation how the action of external things on each other takes place nor yet of the relation of mind and body, that they were merely a preliminary formula of practical scientific value, itself requiring a deeper interpretation—these doctrines were nevertheless by many considered to be the last word of the philosopher who, denouncing the reveries of Schelling or the idealistic theories of Hegel, established the science of life and mind on the same basis as that of material things. Published as they were during the years when the modern school of German materialism was at its height,1 these works of Lotze were counted among the opposition literature which destroyed the phantom of Hegelian wisdom and vindicated
- 63. the independent and self-sufficing position of empirical philosophy. Even philosophers of the eminence of I. H. Fichte (the younger) did not escape this misinterpretation of Lotze’s true meaning, though they had his Metaphysik and Logik to refer to, though he promised in his Allgemeine Physiologie (1851) to enter in a subsequent work upon the “bounding province between aesthetics and physiology,” and though in his Medizinische Psychologie he had distinctly stated that his position was neither the idealism of Hegel nor the realism of Herbart, nor materialism, but that it was the conviction that the essence of everything is the part it plays in the realization of some idea which is in itself valuable, that the sense of an all-pervading mechanism is to be sought in this, that it denotes the ways and means by which the highest idea, which we may call the idea of the good, has voluntarily chosen to realize itself. The misinterpretations which he had suffered induced Lotze to publish a small pamphlet of a polemical character (Streitschriften, Leipzig, 1857), in which he corrected two mistakes. The opposition which he had made to Hegel’s formalism had induced some to associate him with the materialistic school, others to count him among the followers of Herbart. Lotze publicly and formally denied that he belonged to the school of Herbart, though he admitted that historically the same doctrine which might be considered the forerunner of Herbart’s teachings might lead to his own views, viz. the monadology of Leibnitz. When Lotze wrote these explanations, he had already given to the world the first volume of his great work, Mikrokosmus (vol. i. 1856, vol. ii. 1858, vol. iii. 1864; 3rd ed., 1876-1880). In many passages of his works on pathology, physiology, and psychology Lotze had distinctly stated that the method of research which he advocated
- 64. there did not give an explanation of the phenomena of life and mind, but only the means of observing and connecting them together; that the meaning of all phenomena, and the reason of their peculiar connexions, was a philosophical problem which required to be attacked from a different point of view; and that the significance especially which lay in the phenomena of life and mind would only unfold itself if by an exhaustive survey of the entire life of man, individually, socially, and historically, we gain the necessary data for deciding what meaning attaches to the existence of this microcosm, or small world of human life, in the macrocosm of the universe. This review, which extends, in three volumes, over the wide field of anthropology, beginning with the human frame, the soul, and their union in life, advancing to man, his mind, and the course of the world, and concluding with history, progress, and the connexion of things, ends with the same idea which was expressed in Lotze’s earliest work, his Metaphysik. The view peculiar to him is reached in the end as the crowning conception towards which all separate channels of thought have tended, and in the light of which the life of man in nature and mind, in the individual and in society, had been surveyed. This view can be briefly stated as follows: Everywhere in the wide realm of observation we find three distinct regions,—the region of facts, the region of laws and the region of standards of value. These three regions are separate only in our thoughts, not in reality. To comprehend the real position we are forced to the conviction that the world of facts is the field in which, and that laws are the means by which, those higher standards of moral and aesthetical value are being realized; and such a union can again only become intelligible through the idea of a personal Deity, who in the creation and preservation of a world has voluntarily chosen certain
- 65. forms and laws, through the natural operation of which the ends of His work are gained. Whilst Lotze had thus in his published works closed the circle of his thought, beginning with a conception metaphysically gained, proceeding to an exhaustive contemplation of things in the light it afforded, and ending with the stronger conviction of its truth which observation, experience, and life could afford, he had all the time been lecturing on the various branches of philosophy according to the scheme of academical instruction transmitted from his predecessors. Nor can it be considered anything but a gain that he was thus induced to expound his views with regard to those topics, and in connexion with those problems, which were the traditional forms of philosophical utterance. His lectures ranged over a wide field: he delivered annually lectures on psychology and on logic (the latter including a survey of the entirety of philosophical research under the title Encyclopädie der Philosophie), then at longer intervals lectures on metaphysics, philosophy of nature, philosophy of art, philosophy of religion, rarely on history of philosophy and ethics. In these lectures he expounded his peculiar views in a stricter form, and during the last decade of his life he embodied the substance of those courses in his System der Philosophie, of which only two volumes have appeared (vol. i. Logik, 1st ed., Leipzig, 1874, 2nd ed., 1880; vol. ii. Metaphysik, 1879). The third and concluding volume, which was to treat in a more condensed form the principal problems of practical philosophy, of philosophy of art and religion, never appeared. A small pamphlet on psychology, containing the last form in which he had begun to treat the subject in his lectures (abruptly terminated through his death on the 1st of July 1881) during the summer session of 1881, has been published by his son. Appended
- 66. to this volume is a complete list of Lotze’s writings, compiled by Professor Rehnisch of Göttingen. To understand this series of Lotze’s writings, it is necessary to begin with his definition of philosophy. This is given after his exposition of logic has established two points, viz. the existence in our mind of certain laws and forms according to which we connect the material supplied to us by our senses, and, secondly, the fact that logical thought cannot be usefully employed without the assumption of a further set of connexions, not logically necessary, but assumed to exist between the data of experience and observation. These connexions of a real not formal character are handed to us by the separate sciences and by the usage and culture of everyday life. Language has crystallized them into certain definite notions and expressions, without which we cannot proceed a single step, but which we have accepted without knowing their exact meaning, much less their origin. In consequence the special sciences and the wisdom of common life entangle themselves easily and frequently in contradictions. A problem of a purely formal character thus presents itself, viz. this—to try to bring unity and harmony into the scattered thoughts of our general culture, to trace them to their primary assumptions and follow them into their ultimate consequences, to connect them all together, to remodel, curtail or amplify them, so as to remove their apparent contradictions, and to combine them in the unity of an harmonious view of things, and especially to investigate those conceptions which form the initial assumptions of the several sciences, and to fix the limits of their applicability. This is the formal definition of philosophy. Whether an harmonious conception thus gained will represent more than an agreement among our thoughts,
- 67. whether it will represent the real connexion of things and thus possess objective not merely subjective value, cannot be decided at the outset. It is also unwarranted to start with the expectation that everything in the world should be explained by one principle, and it is a needless restriction of our means to expect unity of method. Nor are we able to start our philosophical investigations by an inquiry into the nature of human thought and its capacity to attain an objective knowledge, as in this case we would be actually using that instrument the usefulness of which we were trying to determine. The main proof of the objective value of the view we may gain will rather lie in the degree in which it succeeds in assigning to every element of culture its due position, or in which it is able to appreciate and combine different and apparently opposite tendencies and interests, in the sort of justice with which it weighs our manifold desires and aspirations, balancing them in due proportions, refusing to sacrifice to a one-sided principle any truth or conviction which experience has proven to be useful and necessary. The investigations will then naturally divide themselves into three parts, the first of which deals with those to our mind inevitable forms in which we are obliged to think about things, if we think at all (metaphysics), the second being devoted to the great region of facts, trying to apply the results of metaphysics to these, specially the two great regions of external and mental phenomena (cosmology and psychology), the third dealing with those standards of value from which we pronounce our aesthetical or ethical approval or disapproval. In each department we shall have to aim first of all at views clear and consistent within themselves, but, secondly, we shall in the end wish to form some general idea or to risk an opinion how
- 68. laws, facts and standards of value may be combined in one comprehensive view. Considerations of this latter kind will naturally present themselves in the two great departments of cosmology and psychology, or they may be delegated to an independent research under the name of religious philosophy. We have already mentioned the final conception in which Lotze’s speculation culminates, that of a personal Deity, Himself the essence of all that merits existence for its own sake, who in the creation and government of a world has voluntarily chosen certain laws and forms through which His ends are to be realized. We may add that according to this view nothing is real but the living spirit of God and the world of living spirits which He has created; the things of this world have only reality in so far as they are the appearance of spiritual substance, which underlies everything. It is natural that Lotze, having this great and final conception always before him, works under its influence from the very beginning of his speculations, permitting us, as we progress, to gain every now and then a glimpse of that interpretation of things which to him contains the solution of our difficulties. The key to Lotze’s theoretical philosophy lies in his metaphysics, to the exposition of which important subject the first and last of his larger publications have been devoted. To understand Lotze’s philosophy, a careful and repeated perusal of these works is absolutely necessary. The object of his metaphysics is so to remodel the current notions regarding the existence of things and their connexions with which the usage of language supplies us as to make them consistent and thinkable. The further assumption, that the modified notions thus gained have an objective meaning, and that they somehow correspond
- 69. to the real order of the existing world which of course they can never actually describe, depends upon a general confidence which we must have in our reasoning powers, and in the significance of a world in which we ourselves with all the necessary courses of our thoughts have a due place assigned. The principle therefore of these investigations is opposed to two attempts frequently repeated in the history of philosophy, viz.: (1) the attempt to establish general laws or forms, which the development of things must have obeyed, or which a Creator must have followed in the creation of a world (Hegel); and (2) the attempt to trace the genesis of our notions and decide as to their meaning and value (modern theories of knowledge). Neither of these attempts is practicable. The world of many things surrounds us; our notions, by which we manage correctly or incorrectly to describe it, are also ready made. What remains to be done is, not to explain how such a world manages to be what it is, nor how we came to form these notions, but merely this—to expel from the circle and totality of our conceptions those abstract notions which are inconsistent and jarring, or to remodel and define them so that they may constitute a consistent and harmonious view. In this endeavour Lotze discards as useless and untenable many favourite conceptions of the school, many crude notions of everyday life. The course of things and their connexion is only thinkable by the assumption of a plurality of existences, the reality of which (as distinguished from our knowledge of them) can be conceived only as a multitude of relations. This quality of standing in relation to other things is that which gives to a thing its reality. And the nature of this reality again can neither be consistently represented as a fixed and hard substance nor as an unalterable
- 70. something, but only as a fixed order of recurrence of continually changing events or impressions. But, further, every attempt to think clearly what those relations are, what we really mean, if we talk of a fixed order of events, forces upon us the necessity of thinking also that the different things which stand in relations or the different phases which follow each other cannot be merely externally strung together or moved about by some indefinable external power, in the form of some predestination or inexorable fate. The things themselves which exist and their changing phases must stand in some internal connexion; they themselves must be active or passive, capable of doing or suffering. This would lead to the view of Leibnitz, that the world consists of monads, self-sufficient beings, leading an inner life. But this idea involves the further conception of Leibnitz, that of a pre-established harmony, by which the Creator has taken care to arrange the life of each monad, so that it agrees with that of all others. This conception, according to Lotze, is neither necessary nor thoroughly intelligible. Why not interpret at once and render intelligible the common conception originating in natural science, viz. that of a system of laws which governs the many things? But, in attempting to make this conception quite clear and thinkable, we are forced to represent the connexion of things as a universal substance, the essence of which we conceive as a system of laws which underlies everything and in its own self connects everything, but imperceptible, and known to us merely through the impressions it produces on us, which we call things. A final reflection then teaches us that the nature of this universal and all-pervading substance can only be imagined by us as something analogous to our own mental life, where alone we experience the unity of a substance (which we call self)
- 71. preserved in the multitude of its (mental) states. It also becomes clear that only where such mental life really appears need we assign an independent existence, but that the purposes of everyday life as well as those of science are equally served if we deprive the material things outside of us of an independence, and assign to them merely a connected existence through the universal substance by the action of which alone they can appear to us. The universal substance, which we may call the absolute, is at this stage of our investigations not endowed with the attributes of a personal Deity, and it will remain to be seen by further analysis in how far we are able—without contradiction—to identify it with the object of religious veneration, in how far that which to metaphysics is merely a postulate can be gradually brought nearer to us and become a living power. Much in this direction is said by Lotze in various passages of his writings; anything complete, however, on the subject is wanting. Nor would it seem as if it could be the intention of the author to do much more than point out the lines on which the further treatment of the subject should advance. The actual result of his personal inquiries, the great idea which lies at the foundation of his philosophy, we know. It may be safely stated that Lotze would allow much latitude to individual convictions, as indeed it is evident that the empty notion of an absolute can only become living and significant to us in the same degree as experience and thought have taught us to realize the seriousness of life, the significance of creation, the value of the beautiful and the good, and the supreme worth of personal holiness. To endow the universal substance with moral attributes, to maintain that it is more than the metaphysical ground of everything, to say it is
- 72. the perfect realization of the holy, the beautiful and the good, can only have a meaning for him who feels within himself what real not imaginary values are clothed in those expressions. We have still to mention that aesthetics formed a principal and favourite study of Lotze’s, and that he has treated this subject also in the light of the leading ideas of his philosophy. See his essays Ueber den Begriff der Schönheit (Göttingen, 1845) and Ueber Bedingungen der Kunstschönheit, ibid. (1847); and especially his Geschichte der Aesthetik in Deutschland (Munich, 1868). Lotze’s historical position is of much interest. Though he disclaims being a follower of Herbart, his formal definition of philosophy and his conception of the object of metaphysics are similar to those of Herbart, who defines philosophy as an attempt to remodel the notions given by experience. In this endeavour he forms with Herbart an opposition to the philosophies of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, which aimed at objective and absolute knowledge, and also to the criticism of Kant, which aimed at determining the validity of all human knowledge. But this formal agreement includes material differences, and the spirit which breathes in Lotze’s writings is more akin to the objects and aspirations of the idealistic school than to the cold formalism of Herbart. What, however, with the idealists was an object of thought alone, the absolute, is to Lotze only inadequately definable in rigorous philosophical language; the aspirations of the human heart, the contents of our feelings and desires, the aims of art and the tenets of religious faith must be grasped in order to fill the empty idea of the absolute with meaning. These manifestations of the divine
- 73. spirit again cannot be traced and understood by reducing (as Hegel did) the growth of the human mind in the individual, in society and in history to the monotonous rhythm of a speculative schematism; the essence and worth which is in them reveals itself only to the student of detail, for reality is larger and wider than philosophy; the problem, “how the one can be many,” is only solved for us in the numberless examples in life and experience which surround us, for which we must retain a lifelong interest and which constitute the true field of all useful human work. This conviction of the emptiness of terms and abstract notions, and of the fulness of individual life, has enabled Lotze to combine in his writings the two courses into which German philosophical thought had been moving since the death of its great founder, Leibnitz. We may define these courses by the terms esoteric and exoteric—the former the philosophy of the school, cultivated principally at the universities, trying to systematize everything and reduce all our knowledge to an intelligible principle, losing in this attempt the deeper meaning of Leibnitz’s philosophy; the latter the unsystematized philosophy of general culture which we find in the work of the great writers of the classical period, Lessing, Winkelmann, Goethe, Schiller and Herder, all of whom expressed in some degree their indebtedness to Leibnitz. Lotze can be said to have brought philosophy out of the lecture-room into the market-place of life. By understanding and combining what was great and valuable in those divided and scattered endeavours, he became the true successor of Leibnitz. The age in which Lotze lived and wrote in Germany was not one peculiarly fitted to appreciate the position he took up. Frequently misunderstood, yet rarely criticized, he was
- 74. nevertheless greatly admired, listened to by devoted hearers and read by an increasing circle. But this circle never attained to the unity of a philosophical school. The real meaning of Lotze’s teaching is reached only by patient study, and those who in a larger or narrower sense call themselves his followers will probably feel themselves indebted to him more for the general direction he has given to their thoughts, for the tone he has imparted to their inner life, for the seriousness with which he has taught them to consider even small affairs and practical duties, and for the indestructible confidence with which his philosophy permits them to disregard the materialism of science, the scepticism of shallow culture, the disquieting results of philosophical and historical criticism. See E. Pfleiderer, Lotze’s philosophische Weltanschauung nach ihren Grundzügen (Berlin, 1882; 2nd ed., 1884); E. von Hartmann, Lotze’s Philosophie (Leipzig, 1888); O. Caspari, H. Lotze in seiner Stellung zu der durch Kant begründeten neuesten Geschichte der Philosophie (Breslau, 1883; 2nd ed., 1894); R. Falckenberg, Hermann Lotze (Stuttgart, 1901); Henry Jones, A Critical Account of the Philosophy of Lotze (Glasgow, 1895); Paul Lange, Die Lehre vom Instincte bei Lotze und Darwin (Berlin, 1896); A. Lichtenstein, Lotze und Wundt (Bern, 1900). (J. T. M.; H. St.) 1 See Vogt, Physiologische Briefe (1845-1847); Moleschott, Der Kreislauf des Lebens (1852); Büchner, Kraft und Stoff (1855).
- 75. LOUBET, ÉMILE FRANÇOIS (1838- ), 7th president of the French republic, was born on the 30th of December 1838, the son of a peasant proprietor at Marsanne (Drôme), who was more than once mayor of Marsanne. He was admitted to the Parisian bar in 1862, and took his doctorate-in-law next year. He was still a student when he witnessed the sweeping triumph of the Republican party in Paris at the general election in 1863. He settled down to the exercise of his profession in Montélimar, where he married in 1869 Marie Louis Picard. He also inherited a small estate at Grignan. At the crisis of 1870 he became mayor of Montélimar, and thenceforward was a steady supporter of Gambetta’s policy. Elected to the Chamber of Deputies in 1876 by Montélimar he was one of the famous 363 who in June 1877 passed the vote of want of confidence in the ministry of the duc de Broglie. In the general election of October he was re-elected, local enthusiasm for him being increased by the fact that the government had driven him from the mayoralty. In the Chamber he occupied himself especially with education, fighting the clerical system established by the Loi Falloux, and working for the establishment of free, obligatory and secular primary instruction. In 1880 he became president of the departmental council in Drôme. His support of the second Jules Ferry ministry and his zeal for the colonial expansion of France gave him considerable weight in the moderate Republican party. He had
- 76. entered the Senate in 1885, and he became minister of public works in the Tirard ministry (December 1887 to March 1888). In 1892 President Sadi Carnot, who was his personal friend, asked him to form a cabinet. Loubet held the portfolio of the interior with the premiership, and had to deal with the anarchist crimes of that year and with the great strike of Carmaux, in which he acted as arbitrator, giving a decision regarded in many quarters as too favourable to the strikers. He was defeated in November on the question of the Panama scandals, but he retained the ministry of the interior in the next cabinet under Alexandre Ribot, though he resigned on its reconstruction in January. His reputation as an orator of great force and lucidity of exposition and as a safe and honest statesman procured for him in 1896 the presidency of the Senate, and in February 1899 he was chosen president of the republic in succession to Félix Fauré by 483 votes as against 279 recorded by Jules Méline, his only serious competitor. He was marked out for fierce opposition and bitter insult as the representative of that section of the Republican party which sought the revision of the Dreyfus case. On the day of President Faure’s funeral Paul Déroulède met the troops under General Roget on their return to barracks, and demanded that the general should march on the Élysée. Roget sensibly took his troops back to barracks. At the Auteuil steeplechase in June the president was struck on the head with a cane by an anti-Dreyfusard. In that month President Loubet summoned Waldeck-Rousseau to form a cabinet, and at the same time entreated Republicans of all shades of opinion to rally to the defence of the state. By the efforts of Loubet and Waldeck-Rousseau the Dreyfus affair was settled, when Loubet, acting on the advice of General Galliffet, minister of war, remitted the ten years’ imprisonment to which Dreyfus was condemned at Rennes. Loubet’s presidency saw an acute stage of
- 77. the clerical question, which was attacked by Waldeck-Rousseau and in still more drastic fashion by the Combes ministry. The French ambassador was recalled from the Vatican in April 1905, and in July the separation of church and state was voted in the Chamber of Deputies. Feeling had run high between France and England over the mutual criticisms passed on the conduct of the South African War and the Dreyfus case respectively. These differences were composed by the Anglo-French entente, and in 1904 a convention between the two countries secured the recognition of French claims in Morocco in exchange for non-interference with the English occupation of Egypt. President Loubet was a typical example of the peasant-proprietor class, and had none of the aristocratic, not to say monarchical, proclivities of President Fauré. He inaugurated the Paris Exhibition of 1900, received the tsar Nicholas II. in September 1901 and paid a visit to Russia in 1902. He also exchanged visits with King Edward VII., with the king of Italy and the king of Spain. The king of Spain’s visit in 1905 was the occasion of an attempt on his life, a bomb being thrown under his carriage as he was proceeding with his guest to the opera. His presidency came to an end in January 1906, when he retired into private life. LOUDON, ERNST GIDEON, Freiherr von (1717-1790), Austrian soldier, was born at Tootzen in Livonia, on the 2nd of February 1717. His family, of Scottish origin,1 had been settled in
- 78. that country since before 1400. His father was a lieutenant-colonel, retired on a meagre pension from the Swedish service, and the boy was sent in 1732 into the Russian army as a cadet. He took part in Field Marshal Münnich’s siege of Danzig in 1734, in the march of a Russian corps to the Rhine in 1735 and in the Turkish war 1738- 1739. Dissatisfied with his prospects he resigned in 1741 and sought military employment elsewhere. He applied first to Frederick the Great, who declined his services. At Vienna he had better fortune, being made a captain in Trenck’s free corps. He took part in its forays and marches, though not in its atrocities, until wounded and taken prisoner in Alsace. He was shortly released by the advance of the main Austrian army. His next active service, still under Trenck, was in the Silesian mountains in 1745, in which campaign he greatly distinguished himself as a leader of light troops. He was present also at Soor. He retired shortly afterwards, owing to his distaste for the lawless habits of his comrades in the irregulars, and after long waiting in poverty for a regular commission he was at last made a captain in one of the frontier regiments, spending the next ten years in half-military, half-administrative work in the Carlstadt district. At Bunich, where he was stationed, he built a church and planted an oak forest now called by his name. He had reached the rank of lieutenant-colonel when the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War called him again into the field. From this point began his fame as a soldier. Soon promoted colonel, he distinguished himself repeatedly and was in 1757 made a General-feldwacht-meister (major-general of cavalry) and a knight of the newly founded order of Maria Theresa. In the campaign of 1758 came his first opportunity for fighting an action as a commander-in-chief, and he used it so well that Frederick the Great was obliged to give up the siege of Olmütz and retire into Bohemia (action of Dom-stadtl, 30th of June). He was rewarded with
- 79. the grade of lieutenant-field-marshal and having again shown himself an active and daring commander in the campaign of Hochkirch, he was created a Freiherr in the Austrian nobility by Maria Theresa and in the peerage of the Holy Roman Empire by her husband the emperor Francis. Maria Theresa gave him, further, the grand cross of the order she had founded and an estate near Kuttenberg in Bohemia. He was placed in command of the Austrian contingent sent to join the Russians on the Oder. At Kunersdorf he turned defeat into a brilliant victory, and was promoted Feldzeugmeister and made commander-in-chief in Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia. In 1760 he destroyed a whole corps of Frederick’s army under Fouqué at Landshut and stormed the important fortress of Glatz. In 1760 he sustained a reverse at Frederick’s hands in the battle of Liegnitz (Aug. 15th, 1760), which action led to bitter controversy with Daun and Lacy, the commanders of the main army, who, Loudon claimed, had left his corps unsupported. In 1761 he operated, as usual, in Silesia, but he found his Russian allies as timid as they had been after Kunersdorf, and all attempts against Frederick’s entrenched camp of Bunzelwitz (see Seven Years’ War) failed. He brilliantly seized his one fleeting opportunity, however, and stormed Schweidnitz on the night of Sept. 30/October 1st, 1761. His tireless activity continued to the end of the war, in conspicuous contrast with the temporizing strategy of Daun and Lacy. The student of the later campaigns of the Seven Years’ War will probably admit that there was need of more aggressiveness than Daun displayed, and of more caution than suited Loudon’s genius. But neither recognized this, and the last three years of the war are marked by an ever-increasing friction between the “Fabius” and the “Marcellus,” as they were called, of the Austrian army.
- 80. After the peace, therefore, when Daun became the virtual commander-in-chief of the army, Loudon fell into the background. Offers were made, by Frederick the Great amongst others, to induce Loudon to transfer his services elsewhere. Loudon did not entertain these proposals, although negotiations went on for some years, and on Lacy succeeding Daun as president of the council of war Loudon was made inspector-general of infantry. Dissensions, however, continued between Loudon and Lacy, and on the accession of Joseph II., who was intimate with his rival, Loudon retired to his estate near Kuttenberg. Maria Theresa and Kaunitz caused him, however, to be made commander-in-chief in Bohemia and Moravia in 1769. This post he held for three years, and at the end of this time, contemplating retirement from the service, he settled again on his estate. Maria Theresa once more persuaded him to remain in the army, and, as his estate had diminished in value owing to agrarian troubles in Bohemia, she repurchased it from him (1776) on generous terms. Loudon then settled at Hadersdorf near Vienna, and shortly afterwards was made a field-marshal. Of this Carlyle (Frederick the Great) records that when Frederick the Great met Loudon in 1776 he deliberately addressed him in the emperor’s presence as “Herr Feldmarschall.” But the hint was not taken until February 1778. In 1778 came the War of the Bavarian Succession. Joseph and Lacy were now reconciled to Loudon, and Loudon and Lacy commanded the two armies in the field. On this occasion, however, Loudon seems to have in a measure fallen below his reputation, while Lacy, who was opposed to Frederick’s own army, earned new laurels. For two years after this Loudon lived quietly at Hadersdorf, and then the reverses of other generals in the Turkish War called him for the last time into the field. Though old and broken in health,
- 81. he was commander-in-chief in fact as well as in name, and he won a last brilliant success by capturing Belgrade in three weeks, 1789. He died within the year, on the 14th of July at Neu-Titschein in Moravia, still on duty. His last appointment was that of commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Austria, which had been created for him by the new emperor Leopold. Loudon was buried in the grounds of Hadersdorf. Eight years before his death the emperor Joseph had caused a marble bust of this great soldier to be placed in the chamber of the council of war. His son Johann Ludwig Alexius, Freiherr von Loudon (1762-1822) fought in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars with credit, and rose to the rank of lieutenant-field-marshal. See memoir by v. Arneth in Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, s.v. “Laudon,” and life by G. B. Malleson. 1 His name is phonetically spelt Laudon or Laudohn by Germans, and the latter form was that adopted by himself and his family. In 1759, however, he reverted to the original Scottish form. LOUDOUN, JOHN CAMPBELL, 1st Earl of (1598-1663), Scottish politician, eldest son of Sir James Campbell of Lawers, became Baron Loudoun in right of his wife Margaret, granddaughter of Hugh Campbell, 1st Baron Loudoun (d. 1622). He was created
- 82. earl on the 12th of May 1633, but in consequence of his opposition to Charles I.’s church policy in Scotland the patent was stopped in Chancery. In 1637 he was one of the supplicants against the introduction of the English liturgy; and with John Leslie, 6th earl of Rothes, he took a leading part in the promulgation of the Covenant and in the General Assembly which met at Glasgow in the autumn of 1638. He served under General Leslie, and was one of the Scottish commissioners at the Pacification of Berwick in June 1639. In November of that year and again in 1640 the Scottish estates sent Loudoun with Charles Seton, 2nd earl of Dunfermline, to London on an embassy to Charles I. Loudoun intrigued with the French ambassador and with Thomas Savile, afterwards earl of Sussex, but without much success. He was in London when John Stewart, earl of Traquair, placed in Charles’s hands a letter signed by Loudoun and six others and addressed to Louis XIII. In spite of his protest that the letter was never sent, and that it would in any case be covered by the amnesty granted at Berwick, he was sent to the Tower. He was released in June, and two months later he re-entered England with the Scottish invading army, and was one of the commissioners at Ripon in October. In the following August (1641) Charles opened parliament at Edinburgh in person, and in pursuance of a policy of conciliation towards the leaders of the Covenant Loudoun was made lord chancellor of Scotland, and his title of earl of Loudoun was allowed. He also became first commissioner of the treasury. In 1642 he was sent by the Scottish council to York to offer to mediate in the dispute between Charles and the parliament, and later on to Oxford, but in the second of these instances Charles refused to accept his authority. He was constantly employed in subsequent negotiations, and in 1647 was sent to Charles at Carisbrooke Castle, but the “Engagement” to assist the king there made displeased the extreme
- 83. Covenanters, and Loudoun was obliged to retract his support of it. He was now entirely on the side of the duke of Argyll and the preachers. He assisted in the capacity of lord chancellor at Charles II.’s coronation at Scone, and was present at Dunbar. He joined in the royalist rising of 1653, but eventually surrendered to General Monk. His estates were forfeited by Cromwell, and a sum of money settled on the countess and her heirs. At the Restoration he was removed from the chancellorship, but a pension of £1000 granted him by Charles I. in 1643 was still allowed him. In 1662 he was heavily fined. He died in Edinburgh on the 15th of March 1663. The earl’s elder son, James (d. 1684), 2nd earl of Loudoun, passed his life out of Great Britain, and when he died at Leiden was succeeded by his son Hugh (d. 1731). The 3rd earl held various high positions in England and Scotland, being chosen one of the representative peers for Scotland at the union of the parliaments in 1707. He rendered good service to the government during the rising of 1715, especially at the battle of Sheriffmuir, and was succeeded as 4th earl by his son John (1705-1782), who fought against the Jacobites in 1745, was commander-in-chief of the British force in America in 1756 and died unmarried. The title then passed to James Mure Campbell (d. 1786), a grandson of the 2nd earl, and was afterwards borne by the marquesses of Hastings, descendants of the 5th earl’s daughter and heiress, Flora (1780-1840). Again reverting to a female on the death of Henry, 4th marquess of Hastings, in 1868, it came afterwards to Charles (b. 1855), a nephew of this marquess, who became 11th earl of Loudoun.
- 84. LOUDUN, a town of western France, capital of an arrondissement in the department of Vienne, on an eminence overlooking a fertile plain, 45 m. by rail S.W. of Tours. Pop. (1906) 3931. It was formerly surrounded by walls, of which a single gateway and two towers remain. Of the old castle of the counts of Anjou which was destroyed under Richelieu, the site now forming a public promenade, a fine rectangular donjon of the 12th century is preserved; at its base traces of Roman constructions have been found, with fragments of porphyry pavement, mosaics and mural paintings. The Carmelite convent was the scene of the trial of Urban Grandier, who was burnt alive for witchcraft in 1634; the old Romanesque church of Sainte Croix, of which he was curé, is now used as a market. The church of St Pierre-du-Marché, Gothic in style with a Renaissance portal, has a lofty stone spire. There are several curious old houses in the town. Théophraste Renaudot (d. 1653), founder of the Gazette de France, was born at Loudun, where there is a statue of him. The manufacture of lace and upholstery trimming and of farm implements is carried on, and there is a considerable trade in agricultural products, wine, c. Loudun (Laudunum in ancient times) was a town of importance during the religious wars and gave its name in 1616 to a treaty favourable to the Protestants.
- 85. LOUGHBOROUGH, a market town and municipal borough in the Loughborough (Mid) parliamentary division of Leicestershire, England, near the river Soar and on the Loughborough canal. Pop. (1901) 21,508. It is 110 m. N.N.W. of London by the Midland railway, and is served by the Great Central and a branch of the London and North-Western railways. The neighbourhood is a rich agricultural district, and to the S.W. lies the hilly tract known as Charnwood Forest. The church of All Saints stands on rising ground, and is a conspicuous object for many miles round; it is of Decorated work, and the tower is Perpendicular. The other churches are modern. Public buildings include the town hall and exchange, town offices, county hall and free library. The grammar school, founded in 1495 under the charity of Thomas Burton, occupies modern buildings in pleasant grounds. There is also a girls’ grammar school partly dependent on the same foundation. The principal industry is hosiery making; there are also engineering, iron and dye works and bell foundries. The great bell for St Paul’s cathedral, London, was cast here in 1881. Loughborough was incorporated in 1888. Area, 3045 acres. The manor of Loughborough (Lucteburne, Lucteburg, Lughteburgh) was granted by William the Conqueror to Hugh Lupus, from whom it passed to the Despensers. In 1226-1227 when it belonged to Hugh Despenser he obtained various privileges for
- 86. himself and his men and tenants there, among which were quittance from suits at the county and hundred courts, of sheriffs’ aids and of view of frankpledge, and also a market every Thursday and a fair on the vigil, day and morrow of St Peter ad vincula. The market rights were purchased by the town in 1880 from the trustees of Thomas Cradock, late lord of the manor. Edward II. visited the manor several times when it belonged to his favourite, Hugh Despenser the elder. Among the subsequent lords were Henry de Beaumont and Alice his wife, Sir Edward Hastings, created Baron Hastings of Loughborough in 1558, Colonel Henry Hastings, created baron in 1645, and the earls of Huntingdon. Alexander Wedderburn was created Baron Loughborough in 1780 when he became chief justice of the common pleas. During the 19th century most of the manorial rights were purchased by the local board. Loughborough was at first governed by a bailiff, afterwards by a local board, and was finally incorporated in 1888 under a mayor, 6 aldermen and 18 councillors. It has never been represented in parliament. Lace-making was formerly the chief industry, but machines for making lace set up in the town by John Heathcote were destroyed by the Luddites in 1816, and the manufacture lost its importance. Bell-founding was introduced in 1840. John Cleveland, the Royalist poet, was born at Loughborough in 1613, John Howe the painter in 1630 and Richard Pulteney the botanist in 1730. See Victoria County History, Leicestershire; W. G. D. Fletcher, Chapters in the History of Loughborough (1883); Sir Thomas Pochin, “Historical Description of Loughborough” (1770) (vol. viii. of Bibliotheca topographica Britannica).
- 87. LOUGHREA, a market town of Co. Galway, Ireland, pleasantly situated on the N. shore of Lough Rea, 116 m. W. from Dublin by a branch from Attymon Junction on the Midland Great Western railway. Pop. (1901), 2815. There are slight remains of an Early English Carmelite friary dating c. 1300, which escaped the Dissolution. Loughrea is the seat of the Roman Catholic bishop of Clonfert, and has a cathedral built in 1900-1905. A part of the castle of Richard de Burgh, the founder of the friary, still survives, and there are traces of the town fortifications. In the neighbourhood are a cromlech and two ruined towers, and crannogs, or ancient stockaded islands, have been discovered in the lough. Apart from the surroundings of the lough, the neighbouring country is peculiarly desolate. LOUGHTON, an urban district in the Epping parliamentary division of Essex, England, 11½ m. N.N.E. of Liverpool Street station, London, by the Great Eastern railway. Pop. (1901), 4730. This is one of the villages which has become the centre of a
- 88. Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! ebookbell.com