Too Many Friends: Social Integration, Network Cohesion and Adolescent Depressive Symptoms

Author(s): Christina Falci and Clea McNeely

Source: Social Forces, Vol. 87, No. 4 (Jun., 2009), pp. 2031-2061
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40345007 .
Accessed: 15/06/2014 16:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 NetworkCohesion
Too ManyFriends:Social Integration,
and AdolescentDepressiveSymptoms
ofNebraska-Lincoln
ChristinaFalci, University
Clea McNeely,University ofTennessee-Knoxville

Using a nationally representativesample of adolescents,we

examine associations among social integration (network
size), networkcohesion (alter-density),perceptionsof social
relationships(e.g., social support) and adolescent depressive
symptoms.Wefind that adolescentswith eithertoo large or
too small a networkhave higherlevelsofdepressivesymptoms.
Amonggirls,however,theilleffects ofover-integrationonlyoccur
at low levelsof networkcohesion.For boys,in contrast,the ill
effectsof over-integration onlyoccur at highlevelsof network
cohesion.Largesocial networkstendnotto compromise positive
perceptionsoffriend support or belonging; whereas, small
networksare associatedwithlowperceptionsoffriendsupport
and belonging. Hence,perceptions mediate
ofsocial relationships
theill effects
of under-integration, but not on
over-integration,
depressivesymptoms.

Roughly30 percentof adolescents reportmoderateto severe depressive

symptoms(Rushton,Forcierand Schectman2002). The earlyoccurrence
of depressionin adolescence sets a foundation forrecurrentand severe
depressiveepisodes laterin life(Belsherand Costello1988; Kovacs et al.
1984). Depressioninadolescence is also an urgenthealthconcern.Depres-
sivesymptomsarethestrongestpredictor ofsuicidalideationwhich,inturn,
predictssuicideattempts(Kandel,Raveisand Davies 1991). Suicideis the
fourthleadingcause of deathamong 10-14yearolds inthe UnitedStates
and the thirdleadingcause of death among 15-24year olds (Anderson
2001). This researchexploreshow the networkstructure and perception
ofadolescentfriendships influencedepressivesymptomsinadolescence.
Several decades of research make a clear link between social
relationshipsand depressive symptoms in adolescence. This is not
surprising and managingpeerrelationships
giventhatcultivating is a central
developmentaltaskofadolescence, requiring muchtimeand energy.The
vast majority of researchon peer relationshipsfocuses on perceptions

Theauthors funding
acknowledge
gratefully fromtheWilliamT. GrantFoundation. We
wouldalsoliketoexpress to
thanks JimMoody his
sharing
forgraciously SAS for
Programs
AnalyzingNetworks toChristina
usersmanualDirectcorrespondence Falci,University
of
Nebraska-Lincoln, 711OldfatherHall,
ofSociology,
Department NE 68588-0324.
Lincoln,
E-mail:cfalci2@unl.edu.
of NorthCarolinaPress
© The University Social Forces 87(4): 203 1-62.June 2009

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2032 • SocialForces87(4)

ofthose relationships. Adolescentswho perceivehighlevelsof affection

and acceptance frompeers reportfewerdepressive symptoms(Beam
et al. 2002; Formoso,Gonzales and Aiken2000; Furmanand Buhrmester
1992). Relativelyfew studies investigatehow the structureof social
networks- the patternof ties between membersof a social network-
relateto depressivesymptomsamong adolescents (forexceptionssee
Hansell1985; Ueno 2005). The focusofsocial networkanalysisis theties
between individualsratherthan individuals'experiencesor perceptions
of relationships (Wassermanand Faust 1994). An advantageof network
structureanalysisis the abilityto go beyondindividualperceptions:this
researchdoes notrelysolelyon self-reports fromadolescents.
The choice to relysolely on adolescent self-reportis oftendue to
methodologicalchallenges: reportsfromadolescents' friendsare costly
to collectand seldom existinsecondarydatasets. However,studiesthat
relyonlyon self-report of friendships,especially as theyare linkedto
mentalhealth,sufferfromtwo significant limitations.First,self-reported
perceptions, how
including many friendsone has and how supportivethose
friendships are, may be influenced by currentor previousexperiencesof
depressed mood (Turner and Turner1999). Second, and morebroadly,by
relying on adolescents' self-report oftheirfriendship experienceswe fail
to understand theinfluencesofthestructural propertiesoftheirfriendship
network. Structural network characteristicscannotbe accuratelymeasured
fromthe perceptionsofa singlememberofthe network(Wellman1988).
Inthisarticle,social network theoryand methodsare appliedto investigate
the influenceof networkstructureon adolescent depressivesymptoms,
focusingon two dimensionsof networkstructure, social integration
and
networkcohesion.
Social integration is the aspect of networkstructure thathas received
the moststudy.Broadlydefined,itis the degree to whichan individual is
connectedto otherindividualsin a network.Social integration has three
dimensions:the numberofsocial ties,thetypeoftie(e.g., close friendvs.
acquaintance)and thefrequency ofcontact(House, Umbersonand Landis
1988). Ofthese three dimensions,the numberofsocial ties,orthe size of
an adolescent's friendship network,has receivedthe most empiricalat-
tentioninresearchon adolescents (Ennettet al. 2006; Ueno 2005). Social
integration is hypothesizedto have a curvilinear relationshipwithdepres-
sive symptomssuch thathavingeithertoo fewfriends(under-integration)
ortoo many(over-integration) is harmfulto mentalhealth(Durkheim1951;
Pescosolido and Levy2002). Althoughempiricalresearchsupportsthe
claimthatadolescents withtoo few friendship ties are more likelyto ex-
perience depressive symptoms(Brendgan, Vitaro and Bukowski2000;
Ueno 2005),the possibility thathavingtoo manyfriendsmightbe linkedto
depressivesymptomsinadolescents has notbeen adequatelyexplored.1

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2033
NetworkStructure

The possibilitythat propertiesof social networkstructurefunction

multiplicatively ratherthan additivelyhas seldom been explored for
adolescent networks (for an exception see Haynie 2001). Previous
research on adolescents typicallyhas treateddifferent dimensionsof
networkstructureas theoretically independentconstructs(Ennettet al.
2006; Ueno 2005). This researchtests whetherthe association between
social integrationand depressivesymptomsvaries as a functionof the
cohesiveness of the friendship network.Networkcohesion refersto the
degree of interconnections within a social network.Withina network
of friendshipties, network cohesion assesses the extentto which an
adolescent's friendsare friendswithone another.This research also
explores how the association between the two dimensionsof network
structure- social integration and networkcohesion - affectdepressive
symptoms differently for boys and girls. Previous research has not
assessed gendervariationinthe association between networkstructure
and depressivesymptoms.Yet,social networkresearchinorganizational
settingssuggests the effectof networkstructureon workeroutcomes
differsby gender(Burt1998; Ibarra1997). Similarpatternsmightoccur
when investigating the networkstructureof adolescent friendshipson
depressivesymptoms.
In additionto makingthree new contributionsto research on how
adolescent friendshipnetworksaffectmental health - testing for a
curvilinearrelationshipbetween social integrationand depressive
symptoms,testingwhethernetworkcohesion modifiesthatassociation
and testingforgenderdifferences - thisarticleextendsand verifiesthe
findings ofUeno's (2005) foundational researchlinkingsmallnetworksize
to depressive symptoms.Like Ueno, the argumentthatthe presence
of a single close friendis more important to an individual'swell-being
thanthe numberof friends investigated(Baumeisterand Leary1995).
is
Ueno foundthata singleclose friendis not sufficient to protectagainst
depressivesymptoms. The current research extends thislineofinquiryby
taking into account reciprocity. Ueno (2005) also foundthat the influence
of under-integration on depressivesymptomsis mediatedby perceived
belonging.The current researchexploresan additionalmediator, perceived
support from friends,and also tests whether adolescents' perceptions of
and
belonging support can mediate the effects of as
over-integration, well
as under-integration,on depressivesymptoms.

and DepressiveSymptoms
Under-integration
Adolescentswhoare under-integrated (i.e.,theyhaveveryfewornofriends)
are at greaterriskfordepressivesymptoms(Brendgenet al. 2000; Ueno
2005). Adolescents seek social connectionwithpeers (Baumeisterand

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2034 • SocialForces87(4)

Leary1995; Chu2005). Iftheirefforts theyare morelikely

go unfulfilled, to
experience exclusionand loneliness,and to developdepressivesymptoms
(Rosenbergand Cullough1981). Because thesefindings holdforbothboys
and girls,we do notexpecttheeffectofunder-integration to varybygender.
We also do notexpectthe effectof under-integration to varyby network
cohesion.Bydefinition,sociallyisolatedadolescentscannothavecohesive
networks.It is necessaryto have a minimum of two friendsto knowthe
extentto whichone's friendsare friendswithone another.Even among
adolescentswithmorethantwo friends, smallnetworks,
butrelatively we
do notexpectthe effectof networksize to varybynetworkcohesion.

75OneFriend
Enough?
Some arguethata singleclose friend
can providesufficient
intimacy,support
and companionshipforan adolescent'swell-being(Baumeisterand Leary
1995). We hypothesizethatsmall networksize contributes to depressed
mood even when an adolescent has a reciprocatedclose friendship.
we do notexpectone close friend
Essentially, to meetallofan adolescent's
needs forsocial connection.A singlefrienddoes notgiveaccess to social
channels,bothofwhichhelpa studentfitinat school
statusor information
(Crosnoeand McNeelyin press; Walker,Wassermanand Wellman1993).
Thereis previousempiricalsupportforthishypothesis(Ueno 2005).

MeditationofUnder-Integration
byPerceptions and Support
ofBelonging
fromFriends
We examineperceptionsof belongingand supportfromfriendsas two
mediatingmechanismsby whichunder-integration mightlead to higher
levels of depressivesymptomsamong adolescents (House et al. 1988;
Ueno 2005). Perceivedbelongingat school is the sense of being a part
of the social fabricat school, of fitting
in. Not havingfriendsto sit with
in the lunchroom or to pass notes to in class can underminefeelings
of belonging.Seeminglyinnocuous moments,such as passing time or
choosingteams fora class project,become laden withthe potentialfor
feelingsof rejectionand isolation.Thus,adolescentswithfewfriendsare
less likely
to feelthattheybelongat school. Perceivedsupportfromfriends
is theextenttowhichadolescentsbelievethattheirfriends careaboutthem.
Adolescentswithfewfriendsmightperceiveless supportthanadolescents
withmorefriends.In lightofthese predictions, we expectthatperceived
belongingand friendsupportwillmediatethe relationship betweensmall
network size and depressivesymptomsinadolescence. Previousresearch
has demonstrated thatsupportfromfriendsand a sense of belongingare
inverselyrelatedwithdepressive symptoms(Laible,Carlo and Farraelli
2000; McNeelyand Falci2004). Furthermore, usingthe same Add Health

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2035
NetworkStructure

data set, Ueno (2005) foundthat a sense of belongingmediated the

betweennetworksize and adolescentdepressivesymptoms
relationship
when networksize was modeled as a linearrelationship.
Supportfrom
friendshas notbeen exploredpreviouslyas a mediator.

and DepressiveSymptoms
Over-Integration

Over-integration is oftentheorized to resultingreatermentalhealthproblems

(Pescosolidoand Levy2002). Durkheim (1951) arguedthatover-integration
could lead to altruisticsuicide,wherea persontakes hisown life"because
itis hisduty."(Durkheim1951:219) Inthisinstance,an individual sacrifices
himself forhiscommunity (e.g.,a soldier jumping on a livegrenadeto save
fellowsoldiersoran elderlypersoninpoorhealthendinghislifeso as notto
burdenlovedones). Our researchinvestigatesdepressivesymptoms,not
suicide,buttheidea ofdutyorobligationis partly whyover-integration may
lead to higherlevelsofdepressivesymptoms.The roleoffriendship entails
a set of behavioralexpectations,such as providing comfortor assistance
and spendingtimetogether.As the numberof friendsan individualhas
increases,the timeand energycosts of maintaining themalso increases
and mayoutweighthe benefitsof having (Eder 1985; Eder,Evans
friends
and Parker1995). Havingobligationsto manyfriendsmayleave a person
feelingwornout.Too manyfriendscould resultin rolestrainbecause the
demandson the adolescentto fulfill the roleoffriendship are greaterthan
his or herabilityto enact the role(Pearlin1983). Role strain,in turn,can
lead to poorself-assessmentof one's success inenactingthe friendship
role.Bothrolestrainand negativeroleperformance evaluationsare likely
to
to lead depressivesymptoms(Thoits 1991 ).

Does theEffect
ofOver-Integration Cohesionand Gender?
VarybyNetwork
Previousresearch has focused on the independenteffectsof distinct
networkcharacteristics; however,the negativeeffectof havingtoo many
friendsmaydepend on levelsofnetworkcohesion.Networkcohesioncan
be representedas a continuum fromlowto highcohesion.Atone extreme,
an adolescent mighthave a completelyfragmentedlocal networkwhere
noneoftheadolescent's friendsare friendswithone another.Attheother
extreme,an adolescent could have a closed network,where all of the
adolescent's friendsnominateeach otheras a friend.Adolescentstend
to fallsomewhere in the middleof these two extremes,butthe former
extremeis morecommonthanthe latter(see appendixA).
One can understandthe importof the cohesiveness of network
structureintuitivelyby lookingat friendshipstructurevisually.Figure1
shows two largefriendship networksof equal size (15 actors),butwith
varyinglevels of network cohesion. The networkin Panel A has low

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2036 • SocialForces87(4)

withVaryingLevelsofAlter-Density
Figure1. AlterNetworks

PanelA PanelB
= 15%
Alter-density = 50%
Alter-density
Large Network
Fragmented Cohesive
Large Network

networkcohesion; referred to as a largefragmented network.Few ofthe

friendswithinthisadolescent's friendship networkare friendswitheach
other.Of all the possible ties among alters(i.e.,the adolescent's friends),
just 15 percentare actualfriendship ties. The networkinPanelB has high
network cohesion; referred to as a largecohesivenetwork.Inthisnetwork,
an adolescent's friendsalso tend to be friendswithone another.Fifty
percentofthe possibleties betweentheadolescent's friendsare present.
Experienceswithpeerrelationships maydramatically betweenthese
differ
two networkstructuresleadingto differences indepressivesymptoms.
Specifically, adolescents who have large fragmentednetworksmay
reporthigherlevelsofdepressivesymptomsthanadolescents withlarge
cohesive networks.Large fragmentednetworksshould exacerbatethe
role strainof numerousfriendships.Because an adolescent's friends
do not know one anotherin a fragmentednetwork- at least not very
well - any givenfriendwill be unaware of the various demands other
friendsmightplace on the adolescent. Consequently,the social costs
and obligationsof havingnumerousfriendswillbe greaterinfragmented
networksand the adolescent may experience greater role strain.In
contrast,when largenetworksare cohesive,the cohesion mightprovide
some protectionfromthe potentialcosts of manyfriendships.Large
cohesive networksshould be betterable to share and coordinatesocial
supportto a networkmember,therebypreventing the overburdeningof
any one networkmember.Furthermore, knowingthatotherfriendsare
supporting a friendinneed might alleviate feelinginadequateabout one's
own role performance. Thus, large cohesive networksmightbufferthe
negativeeffectsof over-integration on depressivesymptoms.
Theremay,however,be gendervariationinthe patternshypothesized
above. Similarnetworkstructures,such as a large cohesive friendship

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2037
NetworkStructure

networks,can have different effectson healthoutcomes ifthe natureof

social interactionsoccurring within those similarnetworkconfigurations
differ 2004). Patternsofsocial interaction
(Friedkin withinan adolescent's
friendship network to varybytheadolescent's genderforseveral
are likely
reasons. First,adolescent boys face greaterpressure to conformto
masculinerolesthangirlsdo forfeminineroles(Zucker, Wilson-Smith and
Stern1995; Fagot1985) and a failureto conformto normsof masculinity
can result in ridiculefromfriends(Messerschmidt 2000; Chu 2005).
Second, adolescentboys'social interactions tendto revolvearoundsocial
activities,whereas adolescent girlsare more likelyto reportengaging
in mutuallysupportiveinteractions withfriends(Nada-Raja,McGee and
Stanton1992; Frydenberg and Lewis1993).Third,girlsare morelikely than
to
boys privilege the needs of others over their own needs (Rosenfield,
Lennon and White 2005). Clearly,adolescent boys and girlstend to
approachor experiencepeer friendships ina differentmanner.
These potentialgenderdifferences inpatternsofsocial interactionswith
friendsmaylead to genderdifferences intheeffectofnetwork structureon
depressivesymptoms.Specifically, highlevelsofsocial cohesion may not
be as beneficialforadolescentboys comparedto adolescentgirls.Highly
cohesivenetworkswillbe able to exertmorepressureon boysto conform
to groupmasculinity normsthan less cohesive networks(Friedkin 1984;
Haynie2001; Eder and Enke 1991). In orderto avoid ridiculefromnon-
conformity, an adolescentboywillact ina mannerconsistentwithnorms,
evenifthose normsdo notrepresent himpersonally (Chu2005). Inauthentic
self-presentations to
are likely lead to poor mental healthoutcomes(Gecas
1986). Since adolescentboyswithhighly cohesive networksmaybe more
inclinedto have inauthentic self-presentations thanboys in less cohesive
networks, theymay also be more likelyto have higherlevelsofdepressive
symptoms.As a result,highlevelsof social cohesion maynotbuffer the
effectofover-integration on depressivesymptomsforboys.
Second, largefragmented networkswillbe particularly detrimental for
adolescentgirls.Adolescentgirlsare likely to have higherlevelsofidentity
salienceto theroleoffriendship thanboys.Adolescentgirlsreporta higher
numberof peer-relatedstressorsthan boys (Green 1988), and previous
researchon adultsfindsthatbothwomen and men reportreceivingmore
supportfromfriendships withwomenthanfriendships withmen(House et.
al. 1988).Whenroleidentities, such as friendships, have highsalience,the
illeffectsofrolestrainrelatedtotheroleshouldbe exacerbated(Marcussen,
Ritter and Safron2004; Thoits1991). Peer-related stressorsappearto have
a strongerinfluenceon girls'mental health than boys' (Joynerand Urdy
2000; Marcotte,Alainand Gosselin1999). Forgirls,then,largefragmented
networksare likely to be especiallybad. Insum,highly cohesivenetworks
willbuffer thenegativeeffectsofover-integration on depressivesymptoms

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2038 • SocialForces87(4)

forgirlsbutnotboys,and highlyfragmented networkswillexacerbatethe

negative effects
of for
over-integration girlsrelative
to boys.

MediationofOver-Integration
bySocialSupportand SocialBelonging
Previousresearchconsistentlydocuments two linearrelationships:(1.
as networksize increases,so do adolescents' perceptionsof belonging
and support (Haines, Beggs and Hurlbert2002; Walkeret al. 1993);
and (2. as perceptionsof belongingand supportincrease, depressive
symptomsdecrease (Laibleet al. 2000; McNeelyand Falci2004). Ifthis
is the case, then perceptionsof belongingand supportcannotmediate
the hypothesizedassociation between over-integration and depressive
symptoms.Perceptionsof belongingand supportcan onlymediatethe
illeffectsof over-integration
ifover-integration
leads to lower levels of
belonging and support.Although predictpositivelinearrelationships
we
betweennetworksize and perceptionsof belongingand support,we test
the competinghypothesisthatover-integration compromisesperceived
peer supportand the sense of belonging.

TheCurrentStudy
Our researchassesses forthe firsttime the possibilityof a curvilinear
relationshipbetween social integrationand depressive symptomsin
adolescence. Both under-integrated and over-integrated adolescents
are hypothesizedto reporthigherlevels of depressive symptomsthan
adolescents withaverage-sized social networks.However,the effect
of over-integration
on depressive symptomswillvaryas a functionof
both networkcohesion and gender. For girls,large networkswill not
compromisewell-beingiftheyare cohesive. Forboys,however,network
cohesion willnotprotectagainstthe negativeeffectsof over-integration.
Finally,perceptionsof friendsupportand belongingwill mediate the
association between under-integrationand depressive symptoms,but
notthe association between over-integration
and depressivesymptoms.
Higherlevelsofdepressivesymptomsamongover-integrated adolescents
probablyresultfromhigherlevelsofrolestrain,althoughitis notpossible
to testthispotentialmechanismwiththe data used inthisstudy.

Methods

Sample
AddHealthis a stratified
sampleof132 juniorand seniorhighschools inthe
UnitedSates (Udry2003). An in-schoolsurveywas administeredin 1994.
All social networkmeasures are created fromfriendshipsnominations

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2039
NetworkStructure

collectedinthe in-schoolquestionnaire.Allstudentspresenton the day

of the surveywere asked to listup to ten friends,fiveof each gender.
Studentscould nominatefriendsin or outside of theirschool (of course,
networkmeasurescan onlybe constructedwhenthesenderand receiver
attendedthesame school).Schools providea good approximation ofpeer
social networksin adolescence, because the majority of friendship ties
in adolescence occur withinschool. Withinthis study,68 percent all of
friendship nominationswere sent to a friendat school. Forthisanalysis,
we excluded27 ofthe 132 schools forthefollowing reasons: administrator
refusal to collect network data =
(n 8), data processingerrors(n = 1),
all studentsat the school were enrolledin special education(n=2) and
responserateswere less than70 percent,creatingexcessive missingdata
inthefriendship nominations. We selected thecutoffof70 percentbased
on the recommendation from recentresearchon non-responsein social
networks(Kossinets2006).
Approximately one yearafterthe in-schoolsurvey, an in-homeinterview
was conducted witha nationallyrepresentativesub-sample of 20,747
studentswhowereon theschool rostersorhad been interviewed inschool.
Atthatsame time,a surveywas givento a parent,inmostcases themother.
Allnon-network measuresinthisstudyare drawnfromthein-homesurveys
of the adolescent and parent.The analyticsample forthis researchis
restricted to adolescentswho completedboththe in-homeand in-school
questionnaire. Numerousadolescentsdid notfilloutboththein-homeand
in-schoolsurvey,because adolescents who did notfillout the in-school
surveyweretargetedforthein-homesurvey(n = 5,391). Adolescentswho
attendeda schoolexcludedfromthisstudy,as describedabove (n =1 ,267),
and who were noton school rostersbecause theydid not receivea pre-
assigned ID number(n = 437) are dropped.A pre-assignedID numberis
necessaryforcreatingnetworklinkagesamong actorswithinthe school
friendship network. Furthermore, nomination
a friendship sentto a student
withouta pre-assignedID numberor receivedfroma studentwithouta
pre-assignedID is a missingfriendshipnomination.Adolescents who
had personalnetworksinwhichmorethan30 percentof theirfriendship
nominations were missingare also dropped(n = 1,257).
The sample is restrictedto white,black and Latinoadolescents who
did not reporthavinga same-sex romanticattraction.Excluding1,605
racial minority students increased the likelihoodthat most studentsin
the sample would attendschools withotherstudentsof the same race.
Because adolescent friendship networksare highlysegregated by race
(Moody 2001a), a lack of racialrepresentation withinone's school may
affectthe size and densityof an adolescent's friendship networkwithin
school and possiblymodifythe effectsof networkstructure. Itis beyond
the scope of this researchto investigatethese unique circumstances.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2040 • SocialForces87(4)

Adolescentswho self-identified as havinga same-sex romanticattraction

=
(n 665) are also excluded because we did notwantto conflatetheclose
friendnetworkvariableswitha romanticrelationship. cases were
Finally,
=
lost because theydid not have a validsamplingweight(n 759) or had
missingdata fromthe in-homequestionnaire(n = 269). The finalsize of
the analyticsample is 9,097.
AlthoughAdd Healthhas a good demographicrepresentation of ado-
lescentsinthe UnitedStates,the totalnumberof friendship nominations
among actors in a school is underreported withinthis data set. The distri-
butionof friendship nominationsis truncatedbecause adolescentswere
onlyable to nominatefivesame-genderfriends.Friendship ties occurmore
- -
oftenwithin ratherthanacross gender(Moody2001b). Forthe sample
used in thisstudy,69 percentof girlsused all fivefemalefriendnomina-
tionsand 56 percentof boys used all fivemale friendnominations. These
percentagesincludeschooland non-schoolfriend nominations. Importantly,
nominating friendsoutsideofschool precludedadolescentsfromnominat-
ingfriends withinschool. Because thenumberoffriendship nominations is
underreported, the estimated size of an adolescents' local network willbe
lowerthanthetruepopulationmean (Kossinets2006). Since ourmeasure
ofnetwork size is truncated we expectourfindings on theinfluence ofover-
on
integration depressivesymptoms to be lower bound estimates. In other
words, due to data limitations our will
findings represent a conservative
estimateoftheeffectofover-integration on depressivesymptoms.

Measures

Depressivesymptomsare measuredwitha 15-itemmodifiedCES-D scale.

Consistentwithpreviousresearch,we excluded the fouritems within
the interpersonalsymptomssub-scale of the CES-D (e.g., questions
about feelinglonely)because theyare closelyrelatedto the independent
variablesin this study.The modifiedversionof the CES-D has a range
between1 and 45 withgood reliability
as measuredbyCronbach'salpha(a
= .82). Perceivedbelongingis a three-itemscale developed byBollenand
Hoyle(1990). Studentswere asked how muchtheyagreed or disagreed
withthe followingstatements:you feel likeyou are a partofyourschool,
youare happyto be at yourschool and youfeelclose to people at school.
Response categoriesrangedfrom1, representing "stronglydisagree"to
5, representing"stronglyagree."A confirmatoryfactormodelfitsthedata
well in this sample (McNeely2005). The perceivedbelongingmeasure
rangesbetween 1 and 13 and has good reliabilityfora three-item
scale (a
= .78). Perceivedfriendsupportis measured bya singlequestionasking
the adolescent to indicatehow muchtheythinktheirfriendscare about
them.The response choices rangedfrom1 "notat all"to 5 "verymuch."

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2041
NetworkStructure

All social networkmeasures are derivedfroman adolescent's local

network, definedas one focalactor(ego) and the actor's directcontacts
(alters). nominatedfriendswho do notattendthe same school haveto
All
be excludedfromthe local network so the networkrepresentsfriendships
within theschool only.Social integration is operationalized bynetwork size.
Networksize is a count of the numberof alterswho make or receivea
friendship nomination fromthefocaladolescent plustheadolescenthim-or
herself. Altersare countedonlyonce, regardlessofwhetherthefriendship
nomination is reciprocated. Wassermanand Faust(1994) callthismeasure
degree, defined as the union of alterswho send and/orreceivea school
friendship nomination to or fromego, plus ego. We use the termnetwork
size because it is more intuitive. Theoretically, networksize can range
from1, indicating thatthe adolescent has neithersent norreceivedany
friendship nominations, to thetotalnumberofstudentsintherespondent's
school minusone. Inpractice,networksize is limitedbythefactthateach
adolescentis onlyallowedto nominatefivefriendsofeach gender.
Network cohesionis operationalized byalter-density, whichassesses the
extentto whichthealters a in local network are friends withone another. It
is calculatedby dividing the actual numberof friendship ties betweenan
adolescent'salters(i.e.,friends) by the total number of possible ties,exclud-
ing in both the denominator and numerator ties with the focal adolescent.
Thealtermatrix was symmetrized, prior to calculating alter-density,to correct
forthe potentially missingnominations due to the rightcensoringoffriend-
ship nominations (Kossinets 2006). We use alter-density as opposed to ego-
densitybecause we do not want to conflate the extent to whicha respon-
dent'sfriendsknowone anotherwiththe respondents'leveloffriendship
reciprocity (i.e.,the extentto whicha friendnominatedbythe respondent
also nominatesthe respondentas a friend). Itis impossibleto calculatethe
alter-density ofa localfriendship network that does nothaveat leasttwo al-
ters.Adolescentswith1 ornoaltersintheirschoolnetwork areassignedthe
valueofzeroforalter-density. Alter-density rangesfrom0, indicating noneof
thefocaladolescent'sfriends arefriends witheach other, to 1, indicatingthat
allofthefocaladolescent's friends are friends with each other.
The measure of a reciprocatedclose friendshipis developed to test
whetherhavinga single close friendis sufficient to preventelevated
depressivesymptomsamong adolescents with few friends. Althoughwe
do nothave data on the closeness of each nominated friendship, we can
takeadvantageoftheorderoffriendship reporting, genderofthefriendship
and whetherthe friendship is reciprocatedto ensurethata modicumof
closeness is presentwithinthe friendship. Respondentswere asked to
nominatetheirclosest male and femalefriendfirst.The firstnomination
could be a romanticrelationshipor a best friend.To avoid confusion
withromanticrelationships, we focus on same-genderfriendshipsand

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2042 . SocialForces87(4)

excludeadolescents who reporta same-sex romanticattraction fromthe

analyticsample. For thisanalysis, an adolescent has a reciprocatedclose
friendship ifthe first friendthey listofthe same gender attends theirsame
school and reciprocatesthe friendship by nominating the adolescent as
a friend.Unreciprocated close friendship indicatesthatthefirstsame-sex
friendnominatedby the adolescent attendsthe same school but does
not reciprocatethe friendshipnomination.Non-schoolclose friendship
indicatesthe firstsame-sex nominatedfrienddid not attendthe same
school. Itis impossibleto determineifthe non-schoolfriendreciprocated.
The omittedreferencecategoryforthese close friendship variablesis the
adolescents who reportedno close friendofthe same gender.
Two additionalfriendship networkmeasures are includedas controls.
First,the numberof nominations made to friendswho do notattendthe
school.On average,adolescentsnominated twofriends who didnotattend
hisorherschool.Withthis control measure, thecoefficientfornetwork size
can be interpreted as the independenteffectof a student'snetworksize
at school. In multivariate analyses,thisvariableis mean-centered because
itinteracts withgender.Second, the numberof missingschool friendship
nominations (i.e.,friendship nominations sentto or receivedfromstudents
whowerenotontheschoolrosterand hencedidnothavea pre-assigned ID).
Morethan80 percentoftheadolescentsinthesampleneither nominatenor
receivenominations fromstudentswithoutID numbers,and an additional
15 percentare missingjustone school friendship nomination.
The following sociodemographic characteristics are included in
multivariate modelsas potentialconfoundersbecause theyare associated
withmentalhealthoutcomes and networkstructure(Eccles et al. 1993;
Moody2001a; Gifford-Smith and Brownell2003): gender,gradeinschool,
race/ethnicity, household income, school size, residentialmobilityand
lengthoftimeincurrentschool. Table 1 reportstheweighteddescriptive
statisticsforthese variables. Household income is based on parental
reportof income on the parentsurvey.Missingvalues forthisvariable
were replacedwiththesample mean(n = 2,072,23 percentofthesample)
and householdincomeis logged inall multivariate analyses. School size
indicates the numberof students attendingthe respondent's school.
Residentialmobility indicatesthenumberofyearstheadolescenthas lived
at hisor hercurrentresidence.Lengthoftimeincurrentschool indicates
the numberofyearstheadolescenthas attendedhisorhercurrent school.

Analytic
Strategy
The social networkmeasureswere createdusingPROC IMLproceduresin
SAS 9.1. OLS regressionmodelstesthypothesesregarding thecurvilinear
relationshipbetween social integrationand depressive symptoms.All

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2043
NetworkStructure

analyses are run in SAS 9.1 and adjusted forAdd Health's complex
samplingdesign (Chantala2006). Specifically, all analyses are weighted
to adjust forover-samples and nonresponse,and the standarderrors
are adjusted to take intoaccount the stratified samplingplan and the
clustering of students within schools.
The jointtest of curvilinearrelationshipsand interactioneffectsfor
degree, alter-density and gender requiredtestinga four-way interaction.
Inclusionof multipleinteractionterms poses the potentialproblemof
multicollinearity. Several approaches explore potentialmulticollinearity
problems.First, network size is transformed to Z-scoresand alter-density
is mean-centered(Jaccard, Wan and Turrisi1990). The VIFs forthe
interaction termsin the four-way model ranged2-5, whichare highbut
below the acceptable thresholdof 10 (Hairet al. 2006). Second, because
of the presence of multicollinearity, the stabilityof the beta coefficients
is assessed by runningthe four-wayinteractionmodel on randomly
selected sets of halfof the analyticsample (Echambadiand Hess 2007).
These subset analyses replicatedourresults.Third,onlyinteraction terms
in an
thatexplainedadditionalvariance the model,using F-test, kept are
(Kromrey and Foster-Johnson 1998). Finally,additionalanalyses stratified
bygender and levels ofalter-density verifiedthe resultsoftheinteractions.
Applying ordinary least squares regression a skewed dependentvari-
to
able raisestheconcernofpossiblespuriousinteraction terms(Osgood,Fink-
en and McMorris 2002; Haynieand Osgood 2005). Forthisreason,theCESD
is transformed usingIRTmethods(thegradedresponsemodel; Samejima
1969) in Mplus.Then,all analyseswere duplicatedusingthe transformed
CESD (i.e., factorscores fromthe Mplus confirmatory factoranalysis)in
a Tobitregressionmodelwiththe IVE-wareSAS moduleto adjustforthe
complexsurveydesign(Raghunathan, Solenbergerand Van Hoewyk2002).
in
The resultsdid notdiffer significance or effectsize. Forsimplicity and in-
the resultsfromthe OLS regressionare presented.Finally,
terpretability, to
investigate the possibility thatunexplained variation inindividualoutcomes
might be due to unspecified differencesbetween schools random effects
models were estimatedin Stata 9 using the xtreg command. Again,the
resultsdid notdiffer in anysubstantiveway fromthe resultsobtainedus-
ingtheSAS surveyreg procedures.To do an additionalcheckofschoolsize
(range = 26 to more than 3,000 students),analyseswere runon a sample
witha minimum schoolsize of500 students,and theresultsdidnotchange.

Results
Network Statistics
Descriptive
Table 1 reportsweighteddescriptivestatistics.On average,adolescents
nominatedor receivednominationsfromalmost eightfriendsin school

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2044 • SocialForces87(4)

and nominatedabouttwofriendsoutsideofschool.The largestfriendship

networkconsisted of 34 adolescents. The average alter-density is 21
percent. In other 20
words, roughly percent of an adolescent's friends
nominateone anotheras friends.Althoughthe maximumreaches 100
percentforalter-density, few adolescents - just 2 percentof the sample
- reach this level of alter-density.
Althoughalter-density is fairly
skewed,
thereis good variationin networksize across all levels of alter-density
(see AppendixA). The vast majority ofthe sample, 88 percent,identified
at least one same-sex friend.Forty-ninepercentofthose who nominated
a same-sex friend(45 percentof the fullsample) had thatfriendship
reciprocated(i.e., thatstudentalso nominatedthe focal adolescent as a
friend).The remainingadolescents eithermade a nomination thatcould
not be reciprocateddue to the studymethodology(e.g., the studentdid
notattendtheschool) orwas notreciprocated forsome otherreason(e.g.,
the alterdid notperceivethe focaladolescentto be a friend).

NetworkStructure
and DepressiveSymptoms

A primaryhypothesisof this studyis that havingtoo few or too many

friendsis associated withgreaterdepressivesymptoms.The multivariate
modelstestingthishypothesisare presentedinTable2. Allmodelscontrol
forthe numberof friendswho do not attendthe school, the number
of friendsmissingfromthe network,and the followingdemographic
characteristics:grade, gender, race, household income, school size,
numberofyearsat current schooland numberofyearsat current residence.
As expected,Model 1 revealsa curvilinear relationshipbetween network
size and depressive symptoms;adolescents withverysmall and very
largenetworksreportslightly higherlevelsof depressivesymptoms.The
squared termfornetworksize is statistically significantand contributes
additionalvariation(F = 20.03, p < .001). As networksize increases,
depressivesymptomsdecline untilnetworksize reaches approximately
12 friends.Beyond 12 friends,the directionof the association reverses,
and depressivesymptomsincreasealongwithnetworksize. Adolescents
witha networkof 24 friendsexperience,on average,the same level of
depressivesymptomsas adolescents withno friends.
Allmodels inTable 2 also show an intriguing associationbetweenthe
numberof non-schoolfriendsand depressivesymptoms,whichwe veri-
fied in analyses stratifiedby gender.For boys, there is no association
betweenthe numberof nominatedfriendswho do notattendthe school
and depressivesymptoms(b= -.042,ns). Forgirls,the numberoffriends
nominatedoutside the school is positivelyassociated withdepressive
symptoms(Model 1: -.042 + .223 = .181, p < .05). Since we do not
know any characteristicsof these friendsoutside of school, which

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2045
NetworkStructure

Table 1: WeightedDescriptiveStatistics
St.d. Min Max
Mean/Proportion
Depressive Symptoms 9.61 6.10 1 43
Friendship Network Structure
Networksize3 8.93 4.42 1 34
Alter-density .21 0 1
Reciprocatedschool closefriend .45 0 1
Unreciprocatedschool close
friend .18 0 1
Non-school closefriend .24 0 1
Noclosefriend .12 0 1
Network Control Variables
#Non-school friends 2.14 2.21 0 10
#Missingschool friendnomination .25 .57 0 5
SocialPerception
Perceivedbelonging 9.49 2.55 1 13
Perceivedfriendsupport 4.28 .77 1 5
Demographic Characteristics
Female .52 0 1
Grade 9.35 1.62 6 12
White .75 0 1
Black .17 0 1
Latino .07 0 1
Household income (in$1,000s) 48.12 49.03 1 1000
Missingonhousehold income .20 0 1
Schoolsize 878.14 780.15 26 3334
#ofyears atcurrentschool 2.84 1.61 1 6
#ofyears atcurrent residence 6J54 5.71 0 19
Notes:Standarddeviationsareonlyreportedfornon-dummy variables.
aThecountfornetwork sizeincludesthefocaladolescent.
N = 9097

could include romanticrelationships,it is hard to speculate on why

havingfriendsoutside of school would compromisethe mentalhealth
of adolescent girls.
Models 2 and 3 test the hypothesisthatsmall networksize contrib-
utes to depressed mood even withthe presence of one close same-sex
friend.Model 2 shows the importanceof havinga close same-sex friend.
Comparedto those who do not have a same-sex close friend,havinga
reciprocatedor non-reciprocatedsame-sex close friendinschool is asso-
ciatedwithlowerdepressivesymptomscomparedto adolescentswithout
a same-sex close friend(-.880,p < .01 and -.829, p < .01, respectively).
Havinga same-sex close friendwho does notattendone's school is also
associated withlowerdepressive symptomscompared to adolescents
withouta same-sex close friend(-.660,p < .05). The consistentpatternof

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2046 • SocialForces87(4)

2J
2U
2 io
5fe§SSSSSSS5oS
i"
• *
i" i" r i* i i i i

I
ja
"a>
e ^-^^f^^^CM^-vOO ^^t^- ^^CM ^-.'«- ^-.CD ^^O) ^^LO ^-^CO ^-^OO ^-
^T-cNio^cN^^^c\jir>co^coirjr^ocz>cocDiqo>cocq

§ ©OO C5OC5OO

£
2
SE .q t- ^co in" oo f^c3^ o"o Pco ^cp r^

c ^> o o "
o o cz>
CO J2 i" i" i" i"
~^
CO "55
&- •Co** -»-
Q
O
&
2
I OJ
t5
^
o
i"
o
i"
o
i"

1o .* .* *
o
U CO CVj CO CO CO CO

I iS S
% o
CD
o

1 t^i>^
« u cn oco
"^ -r-; t-|
in
O

o
"3
.3

I
■S -2 o
t
CO "O CO >

3 * *c
"-it
S .3 .3 © 8
I
3 3 3
« I SI
£s co too"ov. co</>co

I ii'llii
to
3 ^
Q. N
'CO
^-^-v^-vf"^
N
'CO
N
'CO
N
'CO
^S
16
O
"CO
5
Q.-?i
-^
g
.^
g
<D
&
g
<D
&
M
<D
&
M
<D
&
M
CD
= § i § § s-s v'Sii'Si
1
O^^-^^O t_ C m m o CD <D
-C<D <D <D CD CD C O ±^ ±^ ±^ ±^ ±f
U-ZZZZD^IDZ<<<<<

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2047
NetworkStructure

CO

2
g .■
8 g 5 i
5= • I u

* -•- t* -3
o
S 00s ?P5oo)co?oS)£ g
^ CO OOx-f-OT-pCNJLOO ^

5 g '
5 52 * "§
1* 1 Ctf

in .-^f- ^r- -$- ^o> p> g u

t- CO ▼- UO r^"1 +-•
O O• O t- g ej
i" 1' a <u

I £3
cn f^^i o^ cFo5 r^ o to g oj

-«- o <+-.
<+h
^
o co in
O CD O t- *t3 O

O h^CNJ O^CNI CO*CO f^-r- LO ^ 'n

OOCMt-t-t-CO^-COO <U 5

8a
5 8 5 ¥? f g
i ^ 38
^coSc^ScoSf^^fe <^S
OOCMt~Ot-OOt-COO ^£ (D
ON <L> O
o >%73

* ?SSv

I IIIs
1 ic m*
s| {I
CO -g & C iiil ^ ai *

I U i i §11°
1 51 i 1
I
Kl IIK
f 11 I 1 18251^

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2048 • SocialForces87(4)

associationacross the close friendship variablesindicatesthathavinga

close same-sex friendis protective, regardlessofwhetherthe friendship
is reciprocatedor whetherthe friendattendsthe same school. Model 3
shows thatalthoughhavinga close friendprotectsagainst depressive
symptoms,it does not attenuatethe association between networksize
and depressivesymptoms.Thus,the effectsof havinga friendand net-
worksize appear to be additive.One friendis protective,but each addi-
tionalfriendis incrementally better,up to roughly11 friends.
Model 4 shows the additiveeffectsof networksize and alter-density
on depressive symptoms.The influenceof alter-density on depressive
symptoms varies = <
by gender(b -1.968, p .05). Amonggirls,having
a higherproportion of friendswho are also friendswithone anotheris
associated withlowerlevelsofdepressivesymptoms.Alter-density does
not have a significant effecton depressivesymptomsamong boys (b =
.363, ns). The finalmodel in Table 2 investigateswhetherthe negative
effectofover-integration is exacerbatedamongadolescentsinfragmented
friendship networks (i.e.,networks withlowalter-density),and ifthiseffect
is strongeramong girls.This hypothesisimpliesa four-wayinteraction
between alter-density, the quadratictermfornetworksize and gender.
The four-wayinteractionexplains additionalvariance in the model (F =
7.53, p < .01). To ease interpretation, Figure2 visuallydisplaysthe results
fromModel 5. The dashed lines show the predictedvalues forgirlsand
the solid linesshow the predictedvalues forboys.The linesmarkedwith
a diamondsymbol♦ representadolescents withfragmentednetworks
(~ 10% alterdensity;the25thpercentile foralter-density)
and theunmarked
lines representadolescents withmore cohesive network(-30% alter-
densitythe 75thpercentileforalter-density). The totalheightofthe graph
representstwo-thirds of a standarddeviationfordepressivesymptoms.
Foradolescentgirls,largenetwork size inconjunctionwitha fragmented
social networkis associated with the highest levels of depressive
symptoms(dashed markedline). In contrast,high networkcohesion
protects girls in large networksfromdepressive symptoms(dashed
unmarkedline).Largenetworksize is notassociated withelevatedlevels
of depressive symptomsforgirlswhose friendsare friendswitheach
other.Foradolescent girls,thereis no such thingas too manyfriendsin
a cohesive network, at least intermsof predicting depressivesymptoms.
Amonggirls who have 12 friends,thereis about a one-fifth of standard
deviationdifferencein depressive symptomsbetween girlswho are in
fragmented networksand those incohesivenetworks. These higherlevels
of depressivesymptomsoccur among roughly20 percentof adolescent
girlsin the sample who have networkswith 12 or more friends.It is
important to keep in mindthatdue to data limitations we underestimate
the true size of adolescent friendshipnetworks.Furthermore, in this

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2049
NetworkStructure

acrossValuesof
Figure2. PredictedValueofDepressiveSymptoms
Alter-Densityand Network Size byGender
12.5

115__ +.-
-♦■•♦
1q. ..::-.;•. =L-^___
1Q5

3) **• „ s
^^ ^ *
* *
m% 9.5 ^ m^^T

0> ^^^^
^^^^^^^"^^ ^ b ww||f

jgj , . , , , , , , , , ,
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Network
Size
" ♦ Females: networks- - Females: networks
cohesive
fragmented
networks - Males:cohesive
m^mMales:fragmented networks

sample, the average size of a network is almost nine friends,which is

where the divergence in depressive symptoms across values of alter-
density begins (see Figure2).
The story is quite differentfor boys, represented by the solid lines in
Figure 2. For adolescent boys, large network size in conjunction with a
fragmentedsocial networkis associated withthelowest levels ofdepressive
symptoms (solid marked line). This opposing trend compared to girls is
clearlyvisible in Figure 2; compare the dashed marked line to the solid
marked line. As networksize increases, boys with fragmented networks
and girls with cohesive networks experience declines in depressive
symptoms.Among boys withcohesive networks(solid unmarkedline),the
association between networksize and depressive symptoms is curvilinear.
Havingtoo few or too manyfriendsis associated withelevated depressive
symptoms. Adolescent boys in cohesive networkswith roughly10 friends
reportthe lowest levels of depressive symptoms. The differencebetween
adolescent boys with no friends and boys with 10 friends is about two-
fifthsof a standard deviation fordepressive symptoms.
In sum, over-integrationis associated with higherlevels of depressive
symptoms among girlswith fragmented networks and among boys with
cohesive networks. In contrast, adolescent girls with large cohesive
networks and boys with large fragmented networks tend to have the
lowest levels of depressive symptoms. These findings,however, should

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2050 • SocialForces87(4)

be interpretedwitha modicumof cautionbecause Model 5 shows signs

The standarderrorsforalter-density
of multicollinearity. and networksize
4
between models and 5 increase, and the VIF scores range2-5 forthe
termsinModel 5. The randomly
interaction selected subset analysesand
analyses stratifiedby gender and levels of alter-densitydo confirmthe
resultsof Model 5.

Do Social Belongingand PeerSupportMediatetheEffects

of
Under-Integration?
Thefinalhypothesisis thatsocial belongingand friend supportmediatethe
relationship between havingfew friendsand depressivesymptoms.For
thisto be true,belongingand supportneed to be relatedto bothnetwork
size and depressivesymptoms.Table 3 demonstratesthe relationship of
social belonging and friend support to network size. The relationshipwas
expectedto be linear;however, as showninTable3, non-linear associations
are present.Including the squared termfornetworksize in models 1 and
2 explainsadditionalvariationin bothperceivedbelonging(Model 1, F =
29.47,p < .001) and perceivedfriend support(Model2, F = 25.90,p < .001).
The nonlinear associationstaketheformofa diminishing returns effect.As
networksize increases,levels of perceivedbelongingand friendsupport
also increase,but onlyto a certainpoint.For perceivedbelonging,the
curveflattensout once the numberoffriendsan adolescent has exceeds
approximately 18 friends.Forperceivedfriendsupport,the slope of the
curveflattensout once the numberoffriendsan adolescent has exceeds
approximately 13 friends.Importantly, havinga large networkdoes not
appear to compromiseperceivedbelongingand friendsupport; rather,
aftera certainpointthereis no added benefitto havingan additionalfriend.
The second requisitefora mediatoris an associationwiththe depen-
dentvariable.Model 1 inTable4 shows thatbothsocial belongingand peer
supportare negatively relatedto depressivesymptoms.Adolescentswith
higherlevelsof perceivedbelongingand supportreportfewerdepressive
symptoms.The remaining models inTable4 test the hypothesisthatper-
ceivedbelonging supportmediatetheassociationbetweenhavingfew
and
friends and depressivesymptoms.As statedpreviously, these variablesare
expectedto mediatetheilleffectsofhavingfewfriends, butnottheilleffects
oftoo manyfriends. Model2 shows thatthecurvilinear associationbetween
network size and depressivesymptomsdisappearswhenperceivedbelong-
ingand supportareincludedinthemodel.Thesquaredtermfornetwork size
does notexplainadditional variationinModel2 (F = 2.16, ns).Model3 drops
thesquaredtermto reveala significant linearassociationbetweennetwork
size and depressivesymptoms, controllingforperceivedbelongingand sup-
oort.The associationis smallbutpositive(b = .187, p < .05); adolescents

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2051
NetworkStructure

Table 3: Unstandardizedand Standardized OLS RegressionCoefficientsof

Perceptionsof Social Relationshipson NetworkStructure
Perceived Perceived
BelongingFriend Support
Model1 Model2
Network
Friendship Structure b beta b beta
size
Network .100***.14 .492*** .20
(.02) (.06)
size*network
Network size -.025**-.07 -.091***-.07
(.01) (.02)
school
Reciprocated closefriend3 .002 .00 .086 .02
(.04) (.15)
school
Unreciprocated -.060 -.03 .210
closefriend3 .03
(.05) (.15)
closefriend3
Non-school -.040 -.02 -.010 .00
(.04) (.15)
Alter-density .163** .05 .289 .03
(.06) (.19)
Control
Network Variables
friends
#Non-school .025** .07 -.022 -.02
(.01) (.03)
female
friends*
#Non-school -.016 -.03 -.070t -.04
(.01) (.04)
nomination.005 .00 .006
friend
school
#Missing .00
(.02) (.07)
Female .229***.15 -.163t -.03
(.02) (.10)
Intercept 3.820 9.980
R-squared .OK .057
Notes:Standarderrorsarein parenthesesall analysesareadjustedforcomplex
samplingdesignand each model controlsforgrade,race,householdincome,school
size,#ofyearsatcurrentschooland # ofyearsatcurrent residence(N = 9097).
aTheomittedreferencecategoryis nothavinga schoolclosefriend
fp<.10 *p<.10 **p<.05 ***p<.01

withlargernetworksreportmoredepressivesymptoms.As expected,per-
ceivedbelongingand supportmediatethe illeffectsofsmallfriendship net-
worksbutnotlargeones, inwhich depressivesymptoms remain elevated.
The higherlevels of depressive symptomsamong adolescents with
manyfriendscannot be explainedby the extentto whichtheyperceive
belongingat school or perceivesupportfromtheirfriends.Furthermore,
in Model 4 of Table 4, the four-wayinteractionstillexplains additional
inthe model,overand above theeffectofbelongingand support
variation

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2052 • SocialForces87(4)

(F = 8.64, p < .01). The differential

effectsof over-integration
across
gender and levelsof network cohesion do notdisappearuponcontrolling
forperceivedbelongingat school orperceivedsupport.Adolescentgirlsin
largefragmented networksreporthigherlevels of depressivesymptoms
compared to girlswithlarge cohesive networks,whereas adolescent
boyswithlargecohesive networksreportthe highestlevelsofdepressive
symptomscomparedto boys withlargefragmented networks.

ws ^ oincoincocococ^CNj

I
C0 *gC\|f- OC5OC5OOOOO
" " "
'* '" •" ■" •" ■" «"
^. _Q

5o icm.^m{
I
^-^ cn .-^o ^^t- ^^o ^-^o ^-^cn ^-^oo ^-^^- ^^cm ^~
Sffl(pqr-r; CI>^^OC\JC\JCNT-;^rCNJ'^C\JTtCOph-:Cpa
I -

I
S*O ur>^-vco^^r^-^-^ oo ^-^Xn ^-.o ^^i-^ ^^^- --
Q
l*-0^?"^ "§. ^ R^ ^s ^« ^fe g
(A

I £ ^> * *
O O CO ^O) ^-^ O /-sN ^-^ CO ,->O) ^-^h^ ^- ^O .- »t- ^~

8. 1 ^-"coot-v- t-ii-ocz) TtcN^cNj'^coinLqcq^

If
I! 1 I !

i!
W ^+^
I* **-^ T-I ■
I
- '*"

N) O

H 3
« o
"2 ~

£ 111
, « *=
3
"S S 1 5 -8 i §
cf | | 11 | i 1I
3 2
2 «
1
|l I is § § § i 1 | & h
2
"*1
a«
O l_ C_ Q> ^ -^ ^ -^ O 2_ CI (D <D
OQ> O'iZCD CD d> CD CD C o 4=« ■»=«
COO- Q- U_Z Z Z Z 0£ 3 Z < <
H o

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2053
NetworkStructure

Discussionand Conclusion

This articlereexaminedthe association between social integration and

mentalhealth.The association between social integration on depressive
symptomsis curvilinear. Consistentwithmuchpreviousresearch,under-
integration (i.e., havingtoo few friends)is associated withhigherlevels
ofdepressivesymptoms(Brendgenet al. 2000; Ueno 2005). Furthermore,
under-integration is associated with elevated depressive symptoms,

r- t- "^- CD O CO "*- OO
• i-
.-.•-.• §> o
OOOO O O O r« *+-•

* '55 ^

oo oo^oo co^ud oTco ^ oPcooTSinoPSS bo §

r **j* \ - ^ ' - ^ --i - ^ ' ^-^ " - '" i" - ^
csi - -'o i 2
CM
g,^O
§ S 5 £; \l
* p| Uk
t- ^^IjD ^-^CO ^-v<3 .- sS O> CJ p.

8 S 5 ^ ^ L

<=?t "? "^ f^ -5 i»

N
I
N
l\ h
<U U ^
v
•c75 a5 ^ 2 O,

-ill - i^ .aJ
§

rCD •<D *<D »25 -i -I -s 8 2?q

CD 52c: 0><+H/,t'HV
.n .n .n .n E o jh ^ g g
s

1 1 1
CDCDCDCDOCDCD-s:
5 >"S "S i gosgo *-• t^ »- •

I I I I "I! | •§ -i ^ § « -S« 1 o
i <i <i <£ Z*II
<
I% i* iT1 llllijv
^Qi^^S^^ (^4 Cd ^ « ■»-

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2054 • SocialForces87(4)

regardlessof the presence of a close friend.Adolescentsneed multiple

friendships to meettheirrelationship needs (Crosnoeand Needham2004;
Crosnoe and McNeely2008). Havingone close friendis not enough to
wardofftheilleffectsofunder-integration. As predicted,under-integration
is equallybad forboysand girls.Thisfinding is consistentwithqualitative
evidencethatadolescent boys desireclose relationswithpeers as much
as girlsdesireclose relations(Chu 2005).
This is the firststudyto our knowledgeto test the hypothesisthat
over-integration increasesdepressivesymptomsand to provideempirical
evidenceinsupportofthe theoreticalclaimthathavingtoo manyfriends
maycompromisementalhealth.Over-integration to lead to higher
is likely
levelsofdepressivesymptoms,due to higherlevelsofrolestrainplacedon
adolescents attempting to meetthe obligationsofnumerousfriends.Itis,
however,important to contextualizeover-integration because itseffectson
depressivesymptomsvaryas a function ofgenderand networkcohesion.
Amongadolescents girls,over-integration is associated withhigherlevels
of depressivesymptomsonlywhen networksare fragmented(i.e., few
ofan adolescent's friendsare friendswitheach other).Incontrast,highly
cohesive networksprotectagainst developing depressive symptoms
among girlsin over-integrated networks.Among girls,social networks
can be largeas long as the adolescent's friendstend to be friendswith
one another.For boys, over-integration is associated withan increase
in depressivesymptomswhen networkcohesion is high.In contrastto
adolescentgirls,adolescentboysinlargefragmented networksreportthe
lowest levels of depressivesymptoms.Forboys, low levels of network
cohesion protectagainstthe potentialilleffectsof over-integration.
These findingshave importantimplications.First,researcherstradi-
tionallyfocus on studyingadolescents withfew social ties. However,we
cannotassume thatteenswitha lotoffriends, and who maybe quitesocial,
are not experiencingdepressivesymptoms.Second, adolescents experi-
ence social networksholistically. Breakingdown each particular network
characteristics intoa set of additive,independentvariablesmaynotaccu-
ratelycapturetheinfluence ofnetwork characteristics on adolescenthealth.
Theoreticallygroundedhypothesesabout how a constellationof network
characteristics jointlyinfluenceadolescent healthwillhelp advance our
understanding inthisnascentlineof research.Third,the gatheringoffull
ranknetwork datawillalso be important foradvancingthisfieldofresearch.
Withinthisresearch,itwas the social ties of an adolescent's friends(net-
workcohesion)thatprovidedthe most insightintothe curvilinear associa-
tionbetweennetworksize and depressivesymptomsinadolescence.
Can perceptionsof belongingand supportfromfriendsmediatethe
effectsof under-and over-integration on depressive symptoms?The
answeris yes and no. The perceptionofbelongingand supportexplained

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2055
NetworkStructure

one end ofthesocial integration continuum, butnottheother.Adolescents

withfew or no friends(i.e., under-integrated) reportedlower levels of
perceivedsupportand belonging; and these perceptionsmediatedthe
associationbetweenunder-integration and depressivesymptoms.Forthe
mostpart,havingmanyfriends (i.e.,over-integration) does notcompromise
of
positiveperceptions support and belonging. As a result,perceptionsof
social relationships did not mediatethe illeffectsof over-integration on
depressivesymptoms.
Thefindings fromthisresearchshouldbe consideredwithin thelimitations
ofthe research. First,the measure of network size is truncated due to the
10 friendnominationlimit;thereby,underestimating both the size and
cohesiveness of an adolescent's network, especiallyamong adolescents
withlargernetworks.Despite thisunderestimation, a curvilinear effectof
networksize on depressivesymptoms is found. Second, the complexity
of the statisticalmodels,in particular the four-way interaction, raises the
of
possibility multicollinearityproblems. For these reasons, the findings from
thisresearchshould be consideredpreliminary untilfutureresearchcan
replicatethese results.The modelswithtwo-wayinteraction termsappear
notto sufferfrommulticollinearity; therefore, we are confidentthatthe
associationbetweennetworksize and depressivesymptomsis curvilinear
and thatnetworkcohesion providesmore protectionagainstdepressive
symptomsforgirlsthan boys. Finally, networkstructureis assumed to
be causallylinkedto perceptionsof social relationships and depressive
Itis
symptoms. possible thatdepressed adolescents are inclined to socially
isolatethemselves from or be isolated by other students at school (Link
et al. 1989). Withregardto over-integration, however, it is less likelythat
depressedadolescentswillselectthemselvesintoover-integrated networks.
Inspiteofthese limitations, thisresearchadds to the limitednumberof
studies on the association between social networkstructure and mental
healthbyproviding empiricalevidenceforthe oftentheorized effectsof ill
over-integration on depressivesymptoms(Durkheim1951; Pescosolido
and Levy 2002). Furthermore, the importantanceof investigatinga
constellationof networkcharacteristics,such as interactionsbetween
social integration and networkcohesion,is shown.We also demonstrate
thata similarconstellationsofnetworkcharacteristics can be experienced
in dramatically differentways by boys and girlsand, as a result,foster
different developmentaloutcomes.

Notes
1. Ueno (2005) did graph mean differencesin depressive symptomsacross
networksize and founda lineartrend.Althoughour studyuses the same
data as Ueno (2005), our measureof networksize differsand we engage in
illeffectsofover-integration.
a morerigorousempiricaltest ofthe potentially

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2056 • SocialForces87(4)

Ueno (2005) measured networksize withthe numberof sent-friendship

nominations. This measure reliessolelyon self-reportsand is capped at 10
possible nominations. Respondents inAdd Healthwere allowed to nominate
fivefriendsof each genderfora maximumof 10 friends.Our measure of
networksize draws on information fromboth the numberof friendship
nominations madeand thenumberreceivedfromotherstudentsintheschool.
Ourmeasureovercomesthe limitations ofself-reportdata and surpasses the
artificial
ceiling of a network size of 10 friends. We believe incorporating
information fromboth sent and received friendshipnominationsmore
accuratelyassesses thesize ofan adolescent'sfriendship network, especially
largenetworks.Over-integrated adolescents mighthave listedmorefriends
iftheywere giventhe opportunity to do so.

References

Anderson,Robert.2001. "Deaths: Leading Causes for 1999." National Vital

StatisticsReport;Volume49, Number 11. Hyattsville,
MD: NationalCenter
forHealthStatistics.

Baumeister,Roy R, and Mark R. Leary.1995. "The Need to Belong: Desire

for InterpersonalAttachmentsAs a Fundamental Human Motivation."
PsychologicalBulletin117(3):497-529.

Beam, Margaret R., VirginiaGil-Rivas,Ellen Greenbergerand Chuansheng

Chen. 2002. "Adolescent Problem Behaviorand Depressed Mood: Risk
and ProtectionWithinand Across Social Contexts."Journalof Youthand
Adolescence 31(5):343-57.

Belsher,Gayle,and Charles G. Costello. 1988. "Relapse AfterRecoveryFrom

UnipolarDepression:a CriticalReview."PsychologicalBulletin104(1):84-96.

Bollen,KennethA.,and RickH. Hoyle.1990. "PerceivedCohesion:A Conceptual

and EmpiricalExamination."Social Forces 69(2):479-504.

Brendgen,Mara,FrankVitaroand WilliamM. Bukowski.2000. "DeviantFriends

and EarlyAdolescents' Emotionaland BehavioralAdjustment."Journalof
Researchon Adolescence 10(2):173-89.

Burt,Ronald.S. 1998. "The Gender of Social Capital."Rationality

and Society
10(1):5-46.

Chantala, Kim. 2006. Guidelines forAnalyzingAdd Health. Chapel Hill,NC:

CarolinaPopulationCenter.

Chu,JudyY. 2005. "AdolescentBoys' Friendships

and PeerGroupCulture."New
DirectionsforChildand AdolescentDevelopment2005(107):7-22.

Crosnoe,Robert,and Clea McNeely.2008. "PeerRelations,AdolescentBehavior,

and Public Health Research and Practice."Familyand Community Health
31(Supplement1):S71-S80.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2057
NetworkStructure

Crosnoe, Robert,and Belinda Needham. 2004. "Holism, ContextualVariability,

and
the Study of Friendships in Adolescent Development." Child Development
75(1):264-79.

Durkheim,Emile. 1951. Suicide. Free Press.

Eccles, Jacquelynne S., Carol Midgley,Allan Wigfield,ChristyMiller Buchanan,

David Reuman, Constance Flanagan and Douglas Mac Iver. 1993.
"Development During Adolescence: The Impact of Stage-Environment Fit
on Young Adolescents' Experiences in Schools and in Families." American
Psychologist 48(2):90-1 01 .

Echambadi, Raj, and James D. Hess. 2007. "Mean-Centering Does Not Alleviate
CollinearityProblems in Moderated Multiple Regression Models." Marketing
Science 26(3):438-45.

Eder, Donna. 1985. "The Cycle of Popularity: Interpersonal Relations Among

Female Adolescents." Sociology of Education 58(3): 154-65.

Eder, Donna, and Janet L. Enke. 1991. "The Structureof Gossip: Opportunities
and Constraints on Collective Expression Among Adolescents." American
Sociological Review 56(4):494-508.

Eder, Donna, Catherine C. Evans and Stephen Parker.1995. School Talk: Gender
and Adolescent Culture. Rutgers UniversityPress.

Ennett,Susan T., KarlE. Bauman, Andrea Hussong, Robert Faris,Vangie A. Foshee

and Li Cai. 2006. "The Peer ContextofAdolescent Substance Use: FindingsFrom
Social NetworkAnalysis."Journalof Research on Adolescence 16(2): 159-86.

Fagot, Beverly I. 1985. "Beyond the Reinforcement Principle: Another Step

Toward Understanding Sex Role Development." Developmental Psychology
21 (6): 1097-1 104.

Formoso, Diana, Nancy A. Gonzales and Leona S. Aiken. 2000. "FamilyConflict

and Children's Internalizing& Externalizing Behavior: Protective Factors."
American Journalof CommunityPsychology 28(2): 175-99.

Friedkin,Noah E. 2004. "Social Cohesion." Annual Review ofSociology 30 A09-25.

. 1984. "Structural Cohesion and Equivalence Explanations of Social

Homogeneity." Sociological Methods and Research 12(3):235-61 .

Frydenberg,Erica, and Lewis Ramon. 1993. "Boys Play Sport and GirlsTurnto
Others: Age, Gender and EthnicityAs Determinants of Coping." Journal of
Adolescence 16(3):253-66.

Furman,Wyndol,and Duane Buhrmester. 1992. "Ageand Sex DifferencesinPerceptions

of Networksof Personal Relationships."ChildDevelopment 63(1):103-15.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2058 • SocialForces87(4)

Gecas, Victor. 1986. "The Motivational Significance of Self-Concept for

Socialization Theory." Pp. 131-56. Advances in Group Processes: Theoryand
Research, Volume 3. E.J. Lawler,editor.JAI Press.

MaryE., and Celia A. Brownell.2003. "Childhood Peer Relationships:

Gifford-Smith,
Social Acceptance, Friendships, and Peer Networks." Journal of School
Psychology 41(4):235-84.

Greene, A.L. 1988. "Early Adolescents' Perceptions of Stress." The Journal of

EarlyAdolescence 8(4):391-403.

Haines, Valerie A., John J. Beggs and Jeanne S. Hurlbert.2002. "Exploringthe

StructuralContextsofthe Support Processes: Social Networks,Social Statuses,
Social Support, and Psychological Distress." Pp. 269-92. Social Networksand
Health. JudithA. Levyand Bernice A. Pescosolido, editors. JAIPress.

Hair,Joseph R, Ronald L. Tatham, Rolph Anderson and William C. Black. 2006.

MultivariateData Analysis. Prentice Hall.

Hansell, Stephen. 1985. "Adolescent FriendshipNetworksand Distress in School."

Social Forces 63(3):698-71 5.

Haynie, Dana L. 2001. "Delinquent Peers Revisited: Does Network Structure

Matter?"American Journal of Sociology 106(4): 101 3-57.

Haynie, Dana L, and D.W. Osgood. 2005. "Reconsidering Peers and Delinquency:
How Do Peers Matter?" Social Forces 84(2): 1 109-30.

House, James S., Debra Umberson and Karl R. Landis. 1988. "Structures and
Processes of Social Support." Annual Review of Sociology 14:293-318.

Ibarra,H. 1997. "Paving an AlternativeRoute: Gender Differences in Managerial

Networks." Social Psychology Quarterly60(1 ):91 -102.

Jaccard, James, Choi K. Wan and Robert Turrisi. 1990. "The Detection and
of InteractionEffectsBetween Continuous Variables in Multiple
Interpretation
Regression." MultivariateBehavioral Research 25(4):467-78.

Joyner,Kara, and J. Richard Udry.2000. "You Don't BringMe Anythingbut Down:

Adolescent Romance and Depression." Journalof Health and Social Behavior
41(4):369-91.

Kandel, Denise, Victoria Raveis and Mark Davies. 1991. "Suicidal Ideation in
Adolescence: Depression and, Substance Use and Other Risk Factors."
Journalof Youthand Adolescence 20(2):289-309.

Kossinets, Gueorgi. 2006. "Effects of Missing Data in Social Networks." Social

A/e/wwte28(3):247-68.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2059
NetworkStructure

Kovacs, Maria,TerryFeinberg,MaryAnnCrouse-Novak,Stana Paulauskas and

1984. "DepressiveDisordersinChildhood:A Longitudinal
RichardFinkelstein.
ProspectiveStudy of Characteristicsand Recovery."Archivesof General
Psychiatry41(3):219-39.

Kromrey,JeffreyD., and LynnFoster-Johnson.1998. "Mean Centeringin

Moderated MultipleRegression: Much Ado About Nothing."Educational
and PsychologicalMeasurement58(1):42-67.

Laible,DeborahJ.,GustavoCarloand Marcela Raffaelli.2000. "The Differential

Relationsof and
Parent PeerAttachment to AdolescentAdjustment."Journal
of Youthand Adolescence 29(1):45-59.
PE. Shroutand B.P Dohrenwend.1989.
Link,BruceG., FT.Cullen,E.L. Struening,
"A ModifiedLabelingTheoryApproachto Mental Disorders: an Empirical
Assessment."AmericanSociologicalReview 54(3):400-23.

Marcotte, Diane, Michel Alain and Marie-Josee Gosselin. 1999. "Gender

Differencesin Adolescent Depression: Gender-TypedCharacteristicsor
Problem-Solving SkillsDeficits?"Sex Roles 41(112):31-48.

Marcussen, Kristen,ChristianRitterand Deborah J. Safron.2004. "The Role

of IdentitySalience and Commitmentin the Stress Process." Sociological
Perspectives47(3):289-312.

McNeely, Clea, and ChristinaFalci. 2004. "School Connectedness and the

TransitionInto and Out of Health-RiskBehaviorAmong Adolescents: A
Comparisonof Social Belongingand Teacher Support."Journalof School
Health74(7):284-92.
theBody,
James W. 2000. Nine Lives:AdolescentMasculinities,
Messerschmidt,
and Violence.WestviewPress.

Segregationin
and Friendship
Moody,James. 2001a. "Race, School Integration,
America."AmericanJournalofSociology107(3):679-716.

. 2001b. Using the Social NetworkData FromAdd Health. Bethesda,

Maryland:Add HealthUsers Workshop.

Nada-Raja, Shyamala, Rob McGee and Warren Stanton. 1992. "Perceived

Attachments to Parents and Peers and Psychological Well-Being in
Adolescence."Journalof Youthand Adolescence 21(4):471-85.

Osgood, Wayne,BarbaraJ. McMorrisand MariaT. Potenza. 2002. "Analyzing

Multiple-ItemMeasures of Crimeand Deviance I: Item Response Theory
Scaling." of Quantitative
Journal 18(4):267-96.
Criminology

Pearlin,Leonard I. 1983. "Role Strainsand Personal Stress." Pp. 3-32. Psychosocial

Stress: Trendsin Theoryand Research . Howard B. Kaplan,editor.Academic Press.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2060 • SocialForces87(4)

Pescosolido, Bernice A., and JudithA. Levy.2002. "The Role of Social Networks
in Health , Illness, Disease and Healing." Pp. 3-25. Social Networksand Health,
Volume 8. JudithLevy and Bernice Pescosolido, editors. Elsevier Science.

Raghunathan, T.E., Peter W. Solenberger and John Van Hoewyk. 2002. IVEware:
Imputation and Variance Estimation Software User Guide. University of
Michigan: Survey Research Center, InstituteforSocial Research.

Rosenberg, Morris, and B.C. Cullough. 1981. "Mattering: InferredSignificance

and Mental Health Among Adolescents." Research in Communityand Mental
Health 2:163-82.

Rosenfield, Sarah, Mary C. Lennon and Helene R. White. 2005. "The Self
and Mental Health: Self-Salience and the Emergence of Internalizingand
ExternalizingProblems." Journal of Health and Social Behavior 46(4):323-40.

Rushton, Jerry,Michelle Forcier and Robin Schectman. 2002. "Epidemiology

of Depressive Symptoms in the National LongitudinalStudy of Adolescent
Health."Journalof theAmerican Academy of Childand Adolescent Psychiatry
41 (2): 199-205.

Samejima, Fumiko1969. "Estimationof LatentAbilityUsing a Response Patternof

MonographSupplement17 34(4, Part2): 104-14.
Graded Scores." Psychometrika

Thoits, Peggy A. 1991. "On Merging IdentityTheory and Stress Research." Social
Psychology Quarterly54(2): 101-12.

Turner,R. Jay, and J. Blake Turner.1999. "Social Integrationand Support." Pp.

301-20. Handbook of the Sociology on Mental Health. Carol Aneshensel and
Jo Phelan, editors. KluwerAcademic/Plenum Publishers.

Udry,J.Richard2003. The National LongitudinalStudy of Adolescent Health (Add

Health), Waves I 8 II, 1994-1996; Wave III, 2001-2002. Available at: http://
www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design.

Ueno, Koji. 2005. "The Effectsof FriendshipNetworks on Adolescent Depressive

Symptoms." Social Science Research 34(3):484-510.

Walker,John M., Paul M. Wasserman and BarryWellman. 1993. "StatisticalModels

forSocial Support Networks."Sociological Methods and Research 22(1 ):71-98.

Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine Faust. 1994. Social Networks Analysis:

Methods and Application. Cambridge UniversityPress.

Wellman, Barry.1988. "StructuralAnalysis: FromMethod and Metaphor to Theory

and Substance." Pp. 19-61. Social Structures: A Network Approach. Barry
Wellman and S.D. Berkowitz,editors. Cambridge UniversityPress.
"
Zucker,Kenneth,Janice KuritaAnitaSternand Debra Wilson-Smith.1995. Children's
Appraisals of Sex-TypedBehavior in TheirPeers." Sex Roles 33(1 1):703-25.

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and DepressiveSymptoms• 2061
NetworkStructure

AppendixA: AverageNetworkSize acrossValuesofAlter-Density

NetworkSize
%
Alter-Density Mean St.d. Min Max N
0 3.51 2.03 1 13 1706
>0and<20 10.61 3.96 5 34 3638
^ 20 and < 40 9.64 3.82 4 29 2650
^ 40 and < 60 8.60 2.98 5 21 661
^60 5.47 2.68 3 17 442
Note:N = 9097

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.156 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 16:21:50 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions