Weak ties or why not to underestimate that awkward lift conversation

Are we being too picky with who we let into our lives? Do you often find yourself surrounded by like-minded folks? Undoubtedly, deep connections play a significant role in one’s well-being. But today, we will explore the particularities behind those “acquaintances”. 

The North American sociologist Mark S. Granovetter drew attention to the social uses of network analysis, having been the study of weak ties an important part of his academic trajectory. In this article, I wish to share some of the sociologist’s insights into social network theory – or the analysis of the network generated by interpersonal relationships. The use of this analysis can, in Granovetter’s words, explain phenomena such as diffusion, social mobility, political organisation, and social cohesion.

To make sure we all speak the same language, let’s take a moment to define what we mean by tie strength. 

How do we establish whether an interpersonal link is strong or weak?

Granovetter stated (1973) that the strength of a tie, in sociology, is determined by a most likely linear combination of the amount of time, emotional intensity, intimacy, and reciprocity which characterises it. Small disclaimer: there are different types of ties defined, and the sociologist refers to positive and symmetric relationships when he writes the paper that we are exploring today.

The strength of these ties can be extremely interesting to look at when predicting the type of relationship individuals develop. A classic example given by Granovetter in his study is the dyad between A, B, and C. 

To make it more tangible, I have decided to use names to portray the friendship triangle: Anne, Ben, and Catherine. If Anne is a great friend of Ben and she also is great buddies with Catherine, chances are that Ben and Catherine will have similarities between them, and will more likely become friends after they meet. However, if Anne has weaker ties with Ben and Catherine, we can predict that Ben and Catherine will be less likely to interact, and if they do, the compatibility will probably be lower than in the previous case.

Building bridges

A relevant concept when diving into weak ties is the bride. This refers to a unique path between two points in a network where information or influence is transmitted. Returning to our previous example, could we say Anne and Ben established a bride? Only if these two individuals have no other strong ties connecting them, which, in a group of friends… is pretty unlikely. Therefore, bridges are mainly characterised as weak ties. Diana is best friends with Emet and they move in shared social circles. However, Anne is an acquaintance of Diana, and they can catch up very occasionally. 

When it comes to diffusion, as Granovetter states, brides play a significant role, as this means that both individuals who represent the bridge have access to each others’ direct or indirect contacts. Diana might learn about how Ben is working at a company that is currently looking for someone to hire. And this information might be useful to his friend Emet.

Fresh flesh

Even though strong ties, such as close friends, might be more willing to help each other, Granovetter found it fascinating how effective weak ties can be, given they provide access to new, fresh information. An acquaintance is more likely to move in circles that differ from our close connections, making these more effective for information exchange and flow. Furthermore, the reach of the flow will be much more efficient when conducted by weak ties. The same type of connections also do a better job connecting members of different small groups. An example Granovetter gives is that a rumour, passed through friends, will make those friends hear the same rumour twice or three times. It will not cross bridges, as it will be spread through strong connections. 

Another interesting characteristic is that removing a weak tie from a network will damage the information or influence flow more than removing a strong tie would. 

I personally find social network theory fascinating! This was a brief introduction, but there’s much more to dive into and much more research has been done since Mark S. Granovetter wrote this very relevant paper. Further research (Gee, L. K, et al, 2017) suggests that this efficiency of weak ties is partly explained due to these being more numerous than the strong ties an individual develops. What do you think about this?

Share your thoughts in the comment section down below or in the forum.

Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2776392

Gee, L. K., Jones, J., Fariss, C. J., Burke, M., & Fowler, J. H. (2017). The paradox of weak ties in 55 countries. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 133, 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2016.12.004