Social Network Analysis

  • Jean Marie McGloin
  • David S. Kirk


Social networks have long been central to some of the most influential theories in criminology. For researchers interested in exploring social networks (or personal networks) and their relationship to crime, network analysis provides the leverage to answer questions in a more refined way than do nonrelational analyses. Network approaches are gaining popularity in criminology, but the formal use of network techniques and methods remains limited. After briefly discussing the background of network analysis, as well as important issues related to sampling, this chapter uses a hypothetical dataset to illustrate the utility of social network graphs and measures, both for theory and policy.


Social Network Network Analysis Criminal Justice Social Network Analysis Centrality Measure 


  1. Alter CF (1988) Function, form and change of juvenile justice systems. Child Youth Serv Rev 10:71–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Braga AA, Kennedy DM, Waring EJ, Piehl AM (2001) Problem-oriented policing, deterrence, and youth violence: an evaluation of Boston’s Operation Ceasefire. J Res Crime Delinq 38:195–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bursik RJ, Grasmick HG (1993) Neighborhoods and crime: the dimensions of effective community control. Lexington Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Burt RS (1992) Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrington P, Scott J, Wasserman S (2005) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Cartwright D, Harary F (1956) Structural balance: a generalisation of Heider’s theory. Psychol Rev 63:277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coady WF (1985) Automated link analysis – artificial intelligence-based tool for investigators. Police Chief 52:22–23Google Scholar
  8. Coles N (2001) It’s not what you know – It’s who you know that counts. Analysing serious crime groups as social networks. Br J Criminol 41:580–594Google Scholar
  9. Curry GD, Thomas RW (1992) Community organization and gang policy response. J Quant Criminol 8:357–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davern M, Hachen DS (2006) The role of information and influence in social networks: examining the association between social network structure and job mobility. Am J Econ Sociol 65:269–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis RH (1981) Social network analysis – An aid in conspiracy investigations. FBI Law Enforc Bull 50:11–19Google Scholar
  12. Erbring L, Young AA (1979) Individuals and social structure: contextual effects as endogenous feedback. Sociol Methods Res 17:396–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Finckenauer JO, Waring EJ (1998) Russian mafia in America: immigration, culture, and crime. Northeastern University Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedkin NE (1984) Structural cohesion and equivalence explanations of social homogeneity. Sociol Methods Res 12:235–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 81:1287–1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gustafson LFJ (1997) An historical and network analysis of the juvenile justice system in the Austin, Texas, metropolitan area. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MIGoogle Scholar
  17. Hagan J (1993) The social embeddedness of crime and unemployment. Criminology 31:465–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harary F, Norman R, Cartwright D (1965) Structural models: an introduction to the theory of directed graphs. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Haynie DL (2001) Delinquent peers revisited: does network structure matter? Am J Sociol 106:1013–1057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Haynie DL, Osgood DW (2005) Reconsidering peers and delinquency: how do peers matter? Soc Forces 84: 1109–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirschi T (1969) Causes of delinquency. University of California Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
  22. Hochstetler A (2001) Opportunities and decisions: interactional dynamics in robbery and burglary groups. Criminology 39:737–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Howlett JB (1980) Analytical investigative techniques: tools for complex criminal investigations. Police Chief 47: 42–45Google Scholar
  24. Huisman M, van Duijn MAJ (2005) Software for social network analysis. In: Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S (eds) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Kasarda JD, Janowitz M (1974) Community attachment in mass society. Am Sociol Rev 39:328–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kennedy DM, Braga AA, Piehl AM (1997) The (un)known universe: mapping gangs and gang violence in Boston. In: Weisburd D, McEwen T (eds) Crime mapping and crime prevention. Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, NYGoogle Scholar
  27. Kennedy DM, Braga AA, Piehl AM, Waring EJ (2001) Reducing gun violence: The Boston gun project’s operation ceasefire. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  28. Kennedy DM, Piehl AM, Braga AA (1996) Youth gun violence in Boston: gun markets, serious youth offenders, and a use reduction strategy. John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  29. Klein MW (1995) The American street gang. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Knoke D, Kuklinski JH (1982) Network analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  31. Krohn MD, Thornberry TP (1993) Network theory: a model for understanding drug abuse among African-American and Hispanic youth. In: De la Rosa M, Adrados JLR (eds) Drug abuse among minority youth: advances in research methodology, NIDA Research Monograph 130. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  32. Lin N (1982) Social resources and instrumental action. In: Marsden P, Lin N (eds) Social structure and network analysis. Sage, Beverly Hills, CAGoogle Scholar
  33. Lin N (1990) Social resources and social mobility: a structural theory of status attainment. In: Breiger RL (ed) Social mobility and social structure. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Maltz MD (1998) Visualizing homicide: a research note. J Quant Criminol 14:397–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McGloin JM (2005) Policy and intervention considerations of a network analysis of street gangs. Criminol Public Policy 43:607–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McGloin JM (2007) The organizational structure of street gangs in Newark, New Jersey: a network analysis methodology. J Gang Res 15:1–34Google Scholar
  37. McGloin JM, Piquero AR (2010) On the relationship between co-offending network redundancy and offending versatility. J Res Crime DelinqGoogle Scholar
  38. McGloin JM, Shermer LO (2009) Self-control and deviant peer structure. J Res Crime Delinq 46:35–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Miller J (1980) Access to interorganizational networks as a professional resource. Am Sociol Rev 45:479–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moreno JL (1934) Who shall survive?. Beacon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Morris M (1993) Epidemiology and social networks: modeling structured diffusion. Sociol Methods Res 22:99–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morselli C, Tremblay P (2004) Criminal achievement, offender networks and the benefits of low self-control. Criminology 42:773–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Natarajan M (2006) Understanding the structure of a large heroin distribution network: a quantitative analysis of qualitative data. J Quant Criminol 22:171–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Osgood DW (1998) Interdisciplinary integration: building criminology by stealing from our friends. Criminologist 23:1, 3–5, 41Google Scholar
  45. Osgood DW, Wilson JK, O’Malley PM (1996) Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. Am Sociol Rev 5:635–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Papachristos AV (2009) Murder by structure: dominance relations and the social structure of gang homicide in Chicago. Am J Sociol 115:74–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Podolny JM, Baron J (1997) Social networks and mobility in the work place. Am Sociol Rev 62:673–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sampson RJ, Groves WB (1989) Community structure and crime: testing social disorganization theory. Am J Sociol 94:744–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F (1997) Neighborhood and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 227:918–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sarnecki J (2001) Delinquent networks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schreck CJ, Fisher BS, Miller JM (2004) The social context of violent victimization: a study of the delinquent peer effect. Justice Q 21:23–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Scott J (2000) Social network analysis: a handbook, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  53. Shaw C, McKay HD (1931) Report on the causes of crime, Volume II. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. Snijders T (2005) Models for longitudinal network data. In: Carrington P, Scott J, Wasserman S (eds) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. Sparrow MK (1991) The application of network analysis to criminal intelligence: an assessment of the prospects. Soc Networks 13:251–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stelfox P (1996) Gang violence: strategic and tactical options. Crown, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  57. Sutherland EH (1947) Principles of criminology, 4th edn. J.B. Lippincott, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
  58. Tita G, Riley JK, Greenwood P (2005) Reducing gun violence: operation ceasefire in Los Angeles, Research in Brief. National Institute of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  59. Warr M (2002) Companions in crime: the social aspects of criminal conduct. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  60. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  61. Wellman B (1983) Network analysis: some basic principles. Sociol Theory 1:155–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wellman B, Berkowitz SD (1988) Introduction: studying social structures. In: Wellman B, Berkowitz SD (eds) Social structures: a network approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  63. Whyte WF (1943) Street corner society. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Marie McGloin
    • 1
  • David S. Kirk
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Criminology and Criminal JusticeUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations