The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Weak Ties in Networked Communities
Abstract
Communities with high levels of social capital are likely to have a higher quality of life than communities with low social capital. This is due to the greater ability of such communities to organize and mobilize effectively for collective action because they have high levels of social trust, dense social networks, and well-established norms of mutuality (the major features of social capital). Communities with “bridging” social capital (weak ties across groups) as well as “bonding” social capital (strong ties within groups) are the most effective in organizing for collective action. People who belong to multiple groups act as bridging ties. When people with bridging ties use communication media, such as the Internet, they enhance their capability to educate community members and to organize, as needed, for collective action. This article summarizes evidence from stratified household survey data in Blacksburg, VA, showing that people with weak (bridging) ties across groups have higher levels of community involvement, civic interest, and collective efficacy than people without bridging ties among groups. Moreover, heavy Internet users with bridging ties have higher social engagement, use the Internet for social purposes, and have been attending more local meetings and events since going online than heavy Internet users with no bridging ties. These findings may suggest that the Internet—in the hands of bridging individuals–is a tool for enhancing social relations and information exchange, and for increasing face-to-face interaction, all of which help to build both bonding and bridging social capital in communities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Computer Networks As Social Networks
Wellman, B. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1065547 · Cited by 918
Sociability, Interpersonal Relations, and the Internet: Reconciling Conflicting Findings
NIE, N. H. (2001) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/00027640121957277 · Cited by 803
Cited by
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01474.x · Cited by 2,229
The Third-Level Digital Divide: Who Benefits Most from Being Online?
van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Helsper, E. J. (2015) · Communication and Information Technologies Annual · doi:10.1108/s2050-206020150000010002 · Cited by 1,022
Ifinedo, P. (2016) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.11.007 · Cited by 273
Designing a Liveable Compact City: Physical Forms of City and Social Life in Urban Neighbourhoods
Raman, S. (2010) · Built Environment · doi:10.2148/benv.36.1.63 · Cited by 145
Jurgens, M., & Helsloot, I. (2018) · Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management · doi:10.1111/1468-5973.12212 · Cited by 139
Metadata
- Authors
- Kavanaugh, A. L., Reese, D. D., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B.
- Venue
- The Information Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-04
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 119-131
- ISSN
- 0197-2243 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-6537
- OpenAlex
- W2080996162
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 67.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Weak Ties in Networked Communities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01972240590925320
- The paper
- Kavanaugh, A. L., Reese, D. D., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2005). Weak Ties in Networked Communities. The Information Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240590925320
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.