In this paper, Granovetter attempts to link macro-interactions with micro-interactions through interpersonal networks. Granovetter defines the strength of a tie as “a combination of the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy, ad the reciprocal services which characterize the tie” (1361). There are weak ties, strong ties, and absent ties. In this paper, Granovetter states that weak ties function as bridges while strong ties cannot exist as bridges. Weak social ties are responsible for the structure of social networks and how the information is transferred between members of society.

I found it interesting that Granovetter used mathematical sociology to prove his theory. He noted individuals with letters, making it easier for one to understand his theory, and symbolized the connection between individuals through an unconnected triangle (basically a 45 degree angle). I liked this because then I was able to visualize the connection and bridges between individuals.

I was shocked to find that weak ties are actually more efficient that strong ties. Granovetter gives several examples to prove this claim. One example was of a rumor being spread; if close friends were spreading the rumor to other close friends, the rumor would be heard twice or thrice among the close-knit group. However, if friends of these close friends were to hear the rumor, that is the information is spread through weak ties, the rumor would spread more widely.

I also didn’t realize that the majority of people who got their jobs through contacts only saw these contacts occasionally. In my mind, I thought that those who got jobs from contacts were actually close friends with these contacts. Like Granovetter states, “It is remarkable that people receive crucial information from individuals whose very existence they have forgotten” (1372).

-Anissa Daimally