homophily
washingtonpost.com
Why Everyone You Know Thinks the Same as You
By Shankar Vedantam
Monday, October 16, 2006; A02
You can see it the next time you visit your office cafeteria or a
nearby park: Whites sitting together with whites, blacks with
blacks, young people with other young people. When individuals
from these groups mix, it is usually because they share something
else in common, such as a pastime.
Sociologists call this phenomenon homophily, a somewhat grand word
to describe the idea that birds of a feather flock
together. Thinkers from Plato and Aristotle onward have observed
that people seem to be drawn to others like themselves.
But while the basic idea is simple, homophily has surprisingly
complex causes and consequences. Three weeks ahead of a midterm
election, for example, it is playing a powerful, but largely
invisible, role in politics.
Studies show that most people interested in politics associate
nearly exclusively with others who have similar political
beliefs. In fact, research by sociologist David Knoke at the
University of Minnesota shows that if you know whether a person's
friends are Republicans, Democrats or independents, you can
predict with near certainty that person's political views.
Homophily may help explain some of the bitter partisanship of our
times -- when your friends are drawn exclusively from one half of
the electorate, it is not surprising that you will find the views
of the other half inexplicable.
"I often hear people say with absolute certainty that whoever they
are in favor of is obviously going to do well because they haven't
talked to 'anyone' who supports the other person" in the election,
said Lynn Smith-Lovin, a Duke University sociologist who has
studied homophily. She rolled her eyes and said, "Oh yeah, sure!
That is a good argument."
While the instinct for homophily in politics and other areas seems
hard-wired, technology may be fueling our nature. Cable television
and the Internet have allowed enormous numbers of people in
distant areas to form virtual groups that are very similar to what
you see in the office cafeteria.
Smith-Lovin's research, for example, shows that homophily is on
the rise in the United States on nearly every dimension of social
identity. Ever larger numbers of people seem to be sealing
themselves off in worlds where everyone thinks the way they do. No
Walter Cronkite figure unites audiences today, the sociologist
noted. We can now choose cable stations, magazines and blogs that
see the world exactly as we do. If the research on homophily is
right, those heavily e-mailed partisan screeds from the op-ed
pages are largely talking to those who agree with those points of
view to begin with.
But while people may choose blogs or op-ed columnists because they
agree with those points of view, do they really choose friends the
same way? When was the last time you met someone at a social
gathering and quickly asked him his views on abortion, gay
marriage and the war in Iraq before deciding to be friends? That
does not happen, of course, so one of the most interesting puzzles
about homophily is how it turns out that friends often end up
having the same views on those subjects.
While beliefs matter, there are two other powerful but subtle
factors at work, said sociologist Mario Luis Small of the
University of Chicago: One is demography, and the other is shared
experiences.
Take, for example, two mothers who become friends after meeting at
a day-care center. Beliefs, especially about politics, may never
be part of their explicit conversation. But the day-care center
exerts a very powerful role in selecting people with similar
demographic backgrounds and shared experiences. The mothers are
likely to be about the same age, to face common child-rearing
challenges and to have similar views on how to balance parenting
and work. The fact that they are at this day-care center means
they can afford it, which suggests they are in roughly the same
socioeconomic class.
"It is not quite the case that I meet you and say, 'Oh my
goodness, you also believe in the elimination of Roe v. Wade ,' "
said Small. "Two years later, these guys are friends, but it is
not because we believe the same things, but our experience and our
demographics put us together in the first place."
What this ultimately suggests, Small and Smith-Lovin added, is
that while organizations and schools and workplaces and
neighborhoods and churches may seem to bring together broad mixes
of people, they really do not. Organizations play a very powerful
role in bringing together similar people and in creating
homogenous views on a variety of topics. University professors,
for example, are prone to believe in education, financial aid and
research, but those views also lead to other beliefs about the
importance of government and activism, Smith-Lovin said.
While there is nothing wrong with being around others who are
similar to yourself, both Smith-Lovin and Small said that people
and organizations pay a price for homogeneity. In politics, for
example, the fact that people rarely have friends with different
views makes it difficult to seek common ground or to examine one's
positions closely.
"Most of us would be hard-pressed to provide clear explanations
for our political beliefs," said Small. "If you ask the average
person why they believe what they believe on Roe v. Wade , you are
not going to get a coherent answer. We participate in settings
where we don't have to explain ourselves because everyone else
agrees with us. What this means is, 'I have no reason to challenge
or question my own beliefs.' "
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Why Everyone You Know Thinks the Same as You
By Shankar Vedantam
Monday, October 16, 2006; A02
You can see it the next time you visit your office cafeteria or a
nearby park: Whites sitting together with whites, blacks with
blacks, young people with other young people. When individuals
from these groups mix, it is usually because they share something
else in common, such as a pastime.
Sociologists call this phenomenon homophily, a somewhat grand word
to describe the idea that birds of a feather flock
together. Thinkers from Plato and Aristotle onward have observed
that people seem to be drawn to others like themselves.
But while the basic idea is simple, homophily has surprisingly
complex causes and consequences. Three weeks ahead of a midterm
election, for example, it is playing a powerful, but largely
invisible, role in politics.
Studies show that most people interested in politics associate
nearly exclusively with others who have similar political
beliefs. In fact, research by sociologist David Knoke at the
University of Minnesota shows that if you know whether a person's
friends are Republicans, Democrats or independents, you can
predict with near certainty that person's political views.
Homophily may help explain some of the bitter partisanship of our
times -- when your friends are drawn exclusively from one half of
the electorate, it is not surprising that you will find the views
of the other half inexplicable.
"I often hear people say with absolute certainty that whoever they
are in favor of is obviously going to do well because they haven't
talked to 'anyone' who supports the other person" in the election,
said Lynn Smith-Lovin, a Duke University sociologist who has
studied homophily. She rolled her eyes and said, "Oh yeah, sure!
That is a good argument."
While the instinct for homophily in politics and other areas seems
hard-wired, technology may be fueling our nature. Cable television
and the Internet have allowed enormous numbers of people in
distant areas to form virtual groups that are very similar to what
you see in the office cafeteria.
Smith-Lovin's research, for example, shows that homophily is on
the rise in the United States on nearly every dimension of social
identity. Ever larger numbers of people seem to be sealing
themselves off in worlds where everyone thinks the way they do. No
Walter Cronkite figure unites audiences today, the sociologist
noted. We can now choose cable stations, magazines and blogs that
see the world exactly as we do. If the research on homophily is
right, those heavily e-mailed partisan screeds from the op-ed
pages are largely talking to those who agree with those points of
view to begin with.
But while people may choose blogs or op-ed columnists because they
agree with those points of view, do they really choose friends the
same way? When was the last time you met someone at a social
gathering and quickly asked him his views on abortion, gay
marriage and the war in Iraq before deciding to be friends? That
does not happen, of course, so one of the most interesting puzzles
about homophily is how it turns out that friends often end up
having the same views on those subjects.
While beliefs matter, there are two other powerful but subtle
factors at work, said sociologist Mario Luis Small of the
University of Chicago: One is demography, and the other is shared
experiences.
Take, for example, two mothers who become friends after meeting at
a day-care center. Beliefs, especially about politics, may never
be part of their explicit conversation. But the day-care center
exerts a very powerful role in selecting people with similar
demographic backgrounds and shared experiences. The mothers are
likely to be about the same age, to face common child-rearing
challenges and to have similar views on how to balance parenting
and work. The fact that they are at this day-care center means
they can afford it, which suggests they are in roughly the same
socioeconomic class.
"It is not quite the case that I meet you and say, 'Oh my
goodness, you also believe in the elimination of Roe v. Wade ,' "
said Small. "Two years later, these guys are friends, but it is
not because we believe the same things, but our experience and our
demographics put us together in the first place."
What this ultimately suggests, Small and Smith-Lovin added, is
that while organizations and schools and workplaces and
neighborhoods and churches may seem to bring together broad mixes
of people, they really do not. Organizations play a very powerful
role in bringing together similar people and in creating
homogenous views on a variety of topics. University professors,
for example, are prone to believe in education, financial aid and
research, but those views also lead to other beliefs about the
importance of government and activism, Smith-Lovin said.
While there is nothing wrong with being around others who are
similar to yourself, both Smith-Lovin and Small said that people
and organizations pay a price for homogeneity. In politics, for
example, the fact that people rarely have friends with different
views makes it difficult to seek common ground or to examine one's
positions closely.
"Most of us would be hard-pressed to provide clear explanations
for our political beliefs," said Small. "If you ask the average
person why they believe what they believe on Roe v. Wade , you are
not going to get a coherent answer. We participate in settings
where we don't have to explain ourselves because everyone else
agrees with us. What this means is, 'I have no reason to challenge
or question my own beliefs.' "
© 2006 The Washington Post Company