I argue that the main difference between two schools of relational sociology – field theory and social network analysis – lies in the difference between their respective epistemological stances rather than between their ontological assumptions. While social network analysts have developed sophisticated quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods, they epistemologically rely on their commonsensical understanding of relational structure. In contrast, field theorists are expected to study relational structure by making an epistemological break from their commonsensical understanding of relational structure. Social network analysts’ epistemological position reveals only social ties as the form of relational structure. Field theory’s epistemological position reveals multiple forms of relational structure, including but not limited to those formed by social ties. The main lesson to be learned is that relational sociologists must develop their notion of relational structure by investigating the history of contests among field actors over the meaning of being a member of their field.
AaltolaM (2005) The international airport: The hub–and–spoke pedagogy of the American empire. Global Networks5(3): 261–278.
2.
AltissimoA (2016) Combining egocentric network maps and narratives: An applied analysis of qualitative network map interviews. Sociological Research Online21(2): 1–13.
3.
ArmitageN (2016) The biographical network method. Sociological Research Online21(2): 1–15.
4.
AuneB (1970) Rationalism, Empiricism, and Pragmatism: An Introduction. London: McGraw-Hill.
5.
BachelardG (2002) The Formation of the Scientific Mind: A Contribution to a Psychoanalysis of Objective Knowledge. Manchester: Clinamen.
6.
BakerWFaulknerR (1993) The social organization of conspiracy: Illegal networks in the heavy electrical equipment industry. American Sociological Review58: 837–860.
7.
BellottiE (2016) Qualitative methods and visualizations in the study of friendship networks. Sociological Research Online21(2): 1–19.
8.
BhaskarR (1979) The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. London: Routledge.
9.
BhaskarR (2008) A Realist Theory of Science. London: Routledge.
10.
BilecenBCardonaA (2018) Do transnational brokers always win? A multilevel analysis of social support. Social Networks53: 90–100.
11.
BilecenBGamperMLubbersM (2018) The missing link: Social network analysis in migration and transnationalism. Social Networks53: 1–3.
12.
BorgattiSPHalginDS (2011) On network theory. Organization Science22(5): 1168–1181.
13.
BotteroW (2009) Relationality and social interaction. British Journal of Sociology60(2): 399–420.
14.
BotteroWCrossleyN (2011) Worlds, fields and networks: Becker, Bourdieu and the structures of social relations. Cultural Sociology5(1): 99–119.
15.
BourdieuP (1986) The forms of capitals. In: RichardsonJ (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press, 241–258.
16.
BourdieuP (1990) Homo Academicus. Cambridge: Polity.
17.
BourdieuP (1998a) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
BourdieuP (1998b) Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19.
BourdieuP (2000) Pascalian Meditations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
20.
BourdieuPWacquantLJD (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
BourdieuPChamboredonJCPasseronJC (1991) The Craft of Sociology: Epistemological Preliminaries. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
22.
BreigerRL (1974) The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces53: 181–190.
23.
BurtRS (2004) Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology110(2): 349–399.
24.
CachiaRJariegoIM (2018) Mobility types, transnational ties and personal networks in four highly skilled immigrant communities in Seville (Spain). Social Networks53: 111–124.
25.
CanguilhemG (1978) The Normal and the Pathological. Trans. FawcettCR.Dordrecht: Reidel.
26.
ChamblissWJ (2001) Power, Politics and Crime. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
27.
CrossleyN (2010) Towards Relational Sociology. London: Routledge.
28.
CrossleyN (2013) Interactions and juxtapositions: Conceptualizing ‘relations’ in relational sociology. In: PowellCDépelteauF (eds) Conceptualizing Relational Sociology: Ontological and Theoretical Issues. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 123–145.
29.
CrossleyNEdwardsG (2016) Cases, mechanisms and the real: The theory and methodology of mixed-method social network analysis. Sociological Research Online21(2): 1–15.
30.
CrossleyNIbrahimJ (2012) Critical mass, social networks and collective action: Exploring student political worlds. Sociology46(4): 596–612.
31.
DanchevVPorterMA (2018) Neither global nor local: Heterogeneous connectivity in spatial network structures of world migration. Social Networks53: 4–19.
32.
D’AngeloARyanLTubaroP (2016) Visualization in mixed-methods research on social networks. Sociological Research Online21(2): 1–4.
33.
De NooyW (1991) Social networks and classification in literature. Poetics20: 507–537.
34.
De NooyW (2003) Fields and networks: Correspondence analysis and social network analysis in the framework of field theory. Poetics31(5): 305–327.
35.
DiMaggioP (1987) Classification in art. American Sociological Review52(4): 440–455.
36.
DiMaggioP (1992) Nadel’s paradox revisited: Relational and cultural aspects of organizational structure. In: Nitin Nohria (ed.) Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 118–142.
37.
DirksNB (2011) Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
DurkheimE (2014) The Rules of Sociological Method: And Selected Texts on Sociology and Its Method. New York: Simon and Schuster.
39.
EdwardsGCrossleyN (2009) Measures and meanings: Exploring the ego-net of Helen Kirkpatrick Watts, militant suffragette. Methodological Innovations Online4(1): 37–61.
40.
EmirbayerM (1997) Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology103(2): 281–317.
41.
EmirbayerMGoodwinJ (1994) Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology99(6): 1411–1454.
42.
EriksonE (2013) Formalist and relationalist theory in social network analysis. Sociological Theory31(3): 219–242.
43.
EricksonBH (1996) Culture, class, and connections. American Journal of Sociology102(1): 217–251.
44.
FuhseJA (2009) The meaning structure of social networks. Sociological Theory27(1): 51–73.
45.
FuhseJMützelS (2011) Tackling connections, structure, and meaning in networks: Quantitative and qualitative methods in sociological network research. Quality & Quantity45(5): 1067–1089.
46.
GranovetterMS (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology78(6): 1360–1380.
47.
HeisenbergW (1958) Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. New York: Harper.
48.
HeritageJ (2013) Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
49.
KenisPKnokeD (2002) How organizational field networks shape interorganizational tie-formation rates. Academy of Management Review27(2): 275–293.
50.
KennyA (1986) Rationalism, Empiricism, and Idealism: British Academy Lectures on the History of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.
51.
KoyréA (2013) The Astronomical Revolution: Copernicus-Kepler-Borelli. London: Routledge.
52.
LecourtD (1975) Marxism and Epistemology: Bachelard, Canguilhem and Foucault. London: Verso.
53.
LizardoO (2006) How cultural tastes shape personal networks. American Sociological Review71(5): 778–807.
54.
LovemanM (2014) National Colors: Racial Classification and the State in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.
55.
McLeanPD (1998) A frame analysis of favor seeking in the Renaissance: Agency, networks, and political culture. American Journal of Sociology104(1): 51–91.
56.
McLeanPD (2007) The Art of the Network: Strategic Interaction and Patronage in Renaissance Florence. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
57.
MamdaniM (2014) When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
58.
MarxK (1973) Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
59.
MeyersonE (1925) The Relativistic Deduction: Epistemological Implications of Theory of Relativity. Holland: Reidel.
60.
MischeA (2008) Partisan Publics: Communication and Contention Across Brazilian Youth Activist Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61.
MischeA (2011) Relational sociology, culture, and agency. In: ScottJCarringtonPJ (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis. London: SAGE, 80–97.
62.
MohrJ (2013) Bourdieu’s relational method in theory and practice. In: DépelteauFPowellC (eds) Applying Relational Sociology: Relations, Networks, and Society. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 101–135.
63.
MützelS (2009) Networks as culturally constituted processes: A comparison of relational sociology and actor-network theory. Current Sociology57(6): 871–887.
64.
PachuckiMABreigerRL (2010) Cultural holes: Beyond relationality in social networks and culture. Annual Review of Sociology36: 205–224.
65.
PadgettJFAnsellCK (1993) Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. American Journal of Sociology98(6): 1259–1319.
66.
PopperK (2005) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
67.
PortesA (1998) Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology24: 1–24.
68.
PortesA (2000) The two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum15(1): 1–12.
RyanL (2007) Migrant women, social networks and motherhood: The experiences of Irish nurses in Britain. Sociology41(2): 295–312.
71.
RyanL (2011) Migrants’ social networks and weak ties: Accessing resources and constructing relationships post–migration. The Sociological Review59(4): 707–724.
72.
RyanLD’AngeloA (2018) Changing times: Migrants’ social network analysis and the challenges of longitudinal research. Social Networks53: 148–158.
SwartzDL (2013) Symbolic Power, Politics, and Intellectuals: The Political Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
75.
VaiseySLizardoO (2010) Can cultural worldviews influence network composition?Social Forces88(4): 1595–1618.
76.
WeberM (1949) The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press of Glencoe.
77.
WellmanB (1988) Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In: WellmanBBerkowitzSD (eds) Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19–62.
78.
WhiteHC (2008) Identity and Control: A Structural Theory of Social Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79.
WindzioM (2018) The network of global migration 1990–2013: Using ERGMs to test theories of migration between countries. Social Networks53: 20–29.
