• Rajee Kanagavel


The concluding chapter reflects on the results, reviews the implications of the findings, and considers future directions for research. Based on the abstraction of support exchanges in transnational contexts, comparison of student and expatriate networks sheds light on how mobility is experienced in different situations. The accessibility of these new technologies is not just transforming distant relationships but is also affecting proximate support practices and experiences. The degree of connectedness in today’s digital age is contextualized with social transformation.


  1. Attree, P., French, B., Milton, B., Povall, S., Whitehead, M., & Popay, J. (2011). The experience of community engagement for individuals: A rapid review of evidence. Health & Social Care in the Community, 19(3), 250–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldassar, L., & Merla, L. (Eds.). (2013). Transnational families, migration and the circulation of care: Understanding mobility and absence in family life (Vol. 29). Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Baym, N. K. (2015). Personal connections in the digital age. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  4. Chua, V., Madej, J., & Wellman, B. (2011). Personal communities: The world according to me. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 101–115). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Dahinden, J. (2005). Contesting transnationalism? Lessons from the study of Albanian migration networks from former Yugoslavia. Global Networks, 5(2), 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dahinden, J. (2009). Are we all transnationals now? Network transnationalism and transnational subjectivity: The differing impacts of globalization on the inhabitants of a small Swiss city. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(8), 1365–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gabriel, Z., & Bowling, A. (2004). Quality of life from the perspectives of older people. Ageing & Society, 24(5), 675–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guarnizo, L. E., Portes, A., & Haller, W. (2003). Assimilation and transnationalism: Determinants of transnational political action among contemporary migrants. American Journal of Sociology, 108(6), 1211–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hampton, K., & Wellman, B. (2001). Long distance community in the network society: Contact and support beyond Netville. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 476–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Herz, A. (2015). Relational constitution of social support in migrants’ transnational personal communities. Social Networks, 40, 64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hogan, B. J. (2009). Networking in everyday life. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  12. Holmes, D. (2002). Virtual globalization – An introduction. In Virtual globalization (pp. 11–64). Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Homans, G. C. (1961). Human behavior: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  14. Kadushin, C. (1981). Long term stress reactions: Some causes, consequences, and naturally occurring support systems. Department of Sociology, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  15. Lucassen, L. (2006). Is transnationalism compatible with assimilation? Examples from the Western Europe since 1850. Paper for the conference Migrants, Nations and Citizenship, CRASSH, University of Cambridge, 5–6 July.Google Scholar
  16. Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K. E. (1984). Measuring tie strength. Social Forces, 63(2), 482–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mok, D., & Wellman, B. (2007). Did distance matter before the Internet?: Interpersonal contact and support in the 1970s. Social Networks, 29(3), 430–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Montgomery, C. (2010). Understanding the international student experience. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Portes, A. (1994). Introduction: Immigration and its aftermath. The International Migration Review, 28(4), 632–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rizvi, F. (2005, March). International education and the production of cosmopolitan identities. In Transnational seminar series.Google Scholar
  21. Song, F. W. (2009). Virtual communities: Bowling alone, online together. Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  22. Theodore, N., & Martin, N. (2007). Migrant civil society: New voices in the struggle over community development. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(3), 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vacca, R. (2013). Bridging across nations. The social capital of diversity, brokerage and closure in transnational migrant networks: A study on assimilation patterns in Milan and Barcelona. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca.Google Scholar
  25. Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Viry, G. (2012). Residential mobility and the spatial dispersion of personal networks: Effects on social support. Social Networks, 34(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Waldinger, R. (2010). Rethinking transnationalism. Empiria. Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales, 19, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wellman, B. (1979). The community question: The intimate networks of East Yorkers. American Journal of Sociology, 84(5), 1201–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wellman, B. (1997). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. Contemporary Studies in Sociology, 15, 19–61.Google Scholar
  30. Wellman, B., & Wortley, S. (1990). Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 558–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajee Kanagavel
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Social SciencesSingapore Management UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations