Seemingly, we live in a world where people are free to decide which network members to activate for what sorts of tasks. This is the principle of ‘networked individualism’, where personal autonomy is central to the organization of personal networks. Yet is this autonomy overstated? Applying correspondence analysis (CA) to network survey data from Singapore, this article posits that while networked individualism is a modern trend, categories such as gender, ethnicity, and class, do, in addition to personal autonomy, structure how people match role relationships to tasks. Unlike most studies, which examine the link between social categories and role relationships, or the link between role relationships and tasks, this work incorporates all elements under the rubric of a single study.
Research Professor. Director at Learning Change Project – Research on society, culture, art, neuroscience, cognition, critical thinking, intelligence, creativity, autopoiesis, self-organization, rhizomes, complexity, systems, networks, leadership, sustainability, thinkers, futures ++
4550 Posts in this Blog
- Follow Learning Change on WordPress.com