Core Ties Homophily and Sociocultural Divides in Hungary from 1987 to 2015

REFERENCES

• Allison, Paul D. 1999. “Comparing Logit and Probit Coefficients across Groups.” Sociological Methods and Research 28(2):186–208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison, Paul. 2012. “Logistic Regression for Rare Events.” Retrieved May 18, 2017 (http://www.statisticalhorizons.com/logistic-regression-for-rare-events).
   Google Scholar
• Angelusz, Róbert, and Róbert Tardos. 1988. “A magyarországi kapcsolathálózatok néhány sajátossága” [Some Characteristics of the Hungarian Social Networks]. Szociológiai Szemle 16(2):185–204.
   Google Scholar
• Angelusz, Róbert, and Róbert Tardos. 2001. “Change and Stability in Social Network Resources: The Case of Hungary under Transformation.” Pp. 297–23. in Social Capital: Theory and Research, edited by Nan Lin Karen S. Cook, and Robert Burt. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Blau, Peter Michael. 1977. Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure. Vol. 7. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bogardus, Emory S. 1925. “Social Distance and Its Origins.” Journal of Applied Sociology 9(2):216–26.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, Sheldon, and Thomas A. Wills. 1985. “Stress, Social Support, and the Buffering Hypothesis.” Psychological Bulletin 98(2):310–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dávid, Beáta et al. 2016. “Egocentric Contact Networks in Comparison: Taiwan and Hungary.” Social Networks 44(1):253–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiPrete, Thomas A. et al. 2011. “Segregation in Social Networks Based on Acquaintanceship and Trust.” American Journal of Sociology 116(4):1234–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feld, Scott L. 1982. “Social Structural Determinants of Similarity among Associates.” American Sociological Review 47(6):797–801.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, Claude S. 2009. “The 2004 GSS Finding of Shrunken Social Networks: An Artifact?” American Sociological Review 74(4):657–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, Claude S., and Michael Hout. 2006. Century of Difference: How America Changed in the Last One Hundred Years. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Flap, Henrik. 1990. “Patronage: An Institution in Its Own Right.” Pp. 225–44 in Social Institutions, edited by Michael Hechter Karl Opp and Reinhard Wippler. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Heinze, George et al. 2013. “logistf: Firth’s Bias Reduced Logistic regression. R package.” Retrieved May 18, 2017 (http://cemsiis.meduniwien.ac.at/en/kb/science-research/software/%20statistical-software/fllogistf/).
   Google Scholar
• King, Gary, and Langche Zeng. 2001. “Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data.” Political Analysis 9(2):137–63.
   Google Scholar
• Kmetty, Zoltán, and Júlia Koltai. 2016. “Státuszelérés, társas támogatás, társadalmi törésvonalak A kapcsolathálózati integráció aspektusai” [Status Attainment, Social Support, Social Cleavages: Integration Aspects of Social Networks]. socio.hu 2016(3):1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Kornai, János. 1994. “Transformational Recession: The Main Causes.” Journal of Comparative Economics 19(1):39–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laumann, Edward O. 1973. Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: Wiley InterScience.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Robert K. Merton. 1954. “Friendship as a Social Process: A Substantive and Methodological Analysis.” Pp. 18–66 in Freedom and Control in Modern Society, edited by Morroe Berger Theodore Abel and Charles H. Page. New York: Van Nostrand.
   Google Scholar
• Leitgöb, Heinz. 2013. “The Problem of Modeling Rare events in ML-based Logistic Regression: Assessing Potential Remedies via MC Simulations.” Vortrag gehalten auf der 5th Conference of the European Survey Research Association (ESRA) in Ljubljana 2013. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269708531_The_Problem_of_Modeling_Rare_Events_in_ML-based_Logistic_Regression_-_Assessing_Potential_Remedies_via_MC_Simulations.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, Nan. 1999. “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital.” Connections 22(1):28–51.
   Google Scholar
• Lõrincz, László. 2011. “Az internetes ismerkedés hatása a homofíliára és a homogámiára” [The Impact of Online Dating on Homophily and Homogamy]. Demográfia 54(1):45–68.
   Google Scholar
• Marsden, Peter V. 1988. “Homogeneity in Confiding Relations.” Social Networks 10(1):57–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCallister, Lynne, and Claude S. Fischer. 1978. “A Procedure for Surveying Personal Networks.” Sociological Methods and Research 7(2):131–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew E. Brashears. 2009. “Models and Marginals: Using Survey Evidence to Study Social Networks.” American Sociological Review 74(4):670–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M. Cook. 2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27(1):415–444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sik, Endre. 2010. “Network Capital Dependent Path-Dependency.” Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 1(1):77–102.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, Jeffrey A., Miller McPherson, and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 2014. “Social Distance in the United States Sex, Race, Religion, Age, and Education Homophily among Confidants, 1985 to 2004.” American Sociological Review 79(3):432–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomescu-Dubrow, Irina, and Kazimierz M. Slomczynski. 2016. “Harmonization of Cross-National Survey Projects on Political Behavior: Developing the Analytic Framework of Survey Data Recycling.” International Journal of Sociology 46(1):58–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Utasi, Ágnes. 2003. “Independent, Never Married People in Their Thirties: Remaining Single.” Demográfia English Edition 48(5):122–43.
   Google Scholar
• Vaskovics, László. 2001. “The Sociological Theory of Post-Adolescence.” Review of Sociology 7(1):5–20.
   Google Scholar
• Yardi, Sarita, and Danah Boyd. 2010. “Dynamic Debates: An Analysis of Group Polarization over Time on Twitter.” Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 30(5):316–27.
   Google Scholar