<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Social Isolation Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/</link>
	<description>Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:04:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Baptiste</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-162486</link>
		<dc:creator>Baptiste</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Jul 2006 12:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-162486</guid>
		<description>The NYT has an article today :
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/02/weekinreview/02fountain.html
&lt;a&gt;The Lonely American Just Got a Bit Lonelie&lt;/a&gt; :
&lt;blockquote&gt;There is a new installment in the annals of loneliness. Americans are not only lacking in bowling partners, now they&#039;re lacking in people to tell their deepest, darkest secrets. They&#039;ve hunkered down even more, their inner circle often contracting until it includes only family, only a spouse or, at worst, no one.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>The <span class="caps">NYT</span> has an article today :<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/02/weekinreview/02fountain.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/02/weekinreview/02fountain.html</a><br />
<a>The Lonely American Just Got a Bit Lonelie</a> :<br />
<blockquote>There is a new installment in the annals of loneliness. Americans are not only lacking in bowling partners, now they&#8217;re lacking in people to tell their deepest, darkest secrets. They&#8217;ve hunkered down even more, their inner circle often contracting until it includes only family, only a spouse or, at worst, no one.</blockquote></p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eweininger</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-162216</link>
		<dc:creator>eweininger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-162216</guid>
		<description>I have to assume that the authors of the ASR paper are holding off on the really fun stuff for a follow-up paper.  To get a real reaction to these network measures, someone needs to examine whether and how well they correlate with the gazillion attitudinal variables in the GSS--e.g. racial and religious views, political opinions, to say nothing of things like the &quot;trust in government/schools/unions, etc&quot; suite of questions.  The data aren&#039;t longitudinal, but so what--imagine the play that a finding along the lines of &quot;isolates are less trusting in government/schools/unions, etc.&quot; would get, in light of the already reported &quot;increase in isolation&quot; result.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I have to assume that the authors of the <span class="caps">ASR</span> paper are holding off on the really fun stuff for a follow-up paper.  To get a real reaction to these network measures, someone needs to examine whether and how well they correlate with the gazillion attitudinal variables in the <span class="caps">GSS</span>&#8212;e.g. racial and religious views, political opinions, to say nothing of things like the &#8220;trust in government/schools/unions, etc&#8221; suite of questions.  The data aren&#8217;t longitudinal, but so what&#8212;imagine the play that a finding along the lines of &#8220;isolates are less trusting in government/schools/unions, etc.&#8221; would get, in light of the already reported &#8220;increase in isolation&#8221; result.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lurker</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-162144</link>
		<dc:creator>lurker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:34:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-162144</guid>
		<description>Interesting study. But I do not find a very important aspect mentioned. Litigation. Any social interaction requires an amount of trust and more importantly a freedom to be wrong. Especially with someone to whom one confides.

One can&#039;t say &quot;Nice set of racks!&quot; to a colleague about a third person, without risking being hauled up for sexual harrasment in a court of law. Same thing with road accidents should one be at fault or with most other day to day activities.

Perhaps that is why non-family confidants have gone down in number. The penalty for being outed is very high. And the chance of getting outed is higher with non-family.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Interesting study. But I do not find a very important aspect mentioned. Litigation. Any social interaction requires an amount of trust and more importantly a freedom to be wrong. Especially with someone to whom one confides.</p>

	<p>One can&#8217;t say &#8220;Nice set of racks!&#8221; to a colleague about a third person, without risking being hauled up for sexual harrasment in a court of law. Same thing with road accidents should one be at fault or with most other day to day activities.</p>

	<p>Perhaps that is why non-family confidants have gone down in number. The penalty for being outed is very high. And the chance of getting outed is higher with non-family.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dick meyer</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-162016</link>
		<dc:creator>dick meyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-162016</guid>
		<description>What would be so wrong with a rehash of the bowling alone idea in the light of this study? Seems like an important new lelement in the mix to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>What would be so wrong with a rehash of the bowling alone idea in the light of this study? Seems like an important new lelement in the mix to me.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gorkle</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-161980</link>
		<dc:creator>Gorkle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:51:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-161980</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve never been a fan of network research though I don&#039;t discount the significance of social ties. And I hope this paper doesn&#039;t lead to a rehash of the bowling alone idea. But I wonder if the research measures what we think it does.

This will definitely be a boon to the sex-doll industry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I&#8217;ve never been a fan of network research though I don&#8217;t discount the significance of social ties. And I hope this paper doesn&#8217;t lead to a rehash of the bowling alone idea. But I wonder if the research measures what we think it does.</p>

	<p>This will definitely be a boon to the sex-doll industry.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin James</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-161976</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:34:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-161976</guid>
		<description>Are number of siblings and number of non-family confidants positively correlated?

I guess what my mom said in 1980&#039;s about all those Sony walkmans leading to social isolation must have been right  after all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Are number of siblings and number of non-family confidants positively correlated?</p>

	<p>I guess what my mom said in 1980&#8217;s about all those Sony walkmans leading to social isolation must have been right  after all.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: previously pre</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/comment-page-1/#comment-161970</link>
		<dc:creator>previously pre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/29/social-isolation-again/#comment-161970</guid>
		<description>Now someone get out there and do a truly longitudinal study that would give us some data on how one&#039;s social confidants and acquaintances change over time.

The ASR snapshot was excellent partly because it opens doors for a whole range of useful supplementary research.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Now someone get out there and do a truly longitudinal study that would give us some data on how one&#8217;s social confidants and acquaintances change over time.</p>

	<p>The <span class="caps">ASR</span> snapshot was excellent partly because it opens doors for a whole range of useful supplementary research.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
