Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kalmijn, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

European Sociological Review 18:101-117 (2002)
© 2002 Oxford University Press

Sex Segregation of Friendship Networks. Individual and Structural Determinants of Having Cross-Sex Friends

Matthijs Kalmijn

Department of Sociology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90.153, 5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands. m.kalmijn{at}kub.nl

Insights from psychological and sociological research are combined to explain why some individuals include more opposite-sex friends in their network than others. Individual determinants include sex-role attitudes and social needs and skills; structural determinants include a person's life course and the composition of settings to which people were exposed. Hypotheses derived from the literature and panel data on young adults in the Netherlands are analysed to test the hypotheses. The results indicate that for women, the chance of having opposite-sex friends is increased by a heterogeneous sex-composition of local settings (schools, work, and associations) and by a high degree of social skills. For men, the chance of opposite-sex friendships is increased by egalitarian sex-role attitudes and by a high degree of loneliness, not by local settings. For both men and women, the chance of having opposite-sex friendships declines sharply over the early life course. When comparing men and women, it is concluded that for women, opportunity structures have the biggest impact, followed by life-course variables and individual characteristics, while for men, individual characteristics are most important, followed by life-course variables and opportunity structures. The relative order of the three explanations thus appears to be the opposite for men and women.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Family IssuesHome page
M. Voorpostel, T. van der Lippe, P. A. Dykstra, and H. Flap
Similar or Different? The Importance of Similarities and Differences for Support Between Siblings
Journal of Family Issues, August 1, 2007; 28(8): 1026 - 1053.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 International Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentHome page
S. K. Cheung and C. McBride-Chang
Correlates of cross-sex friendship satisfaction in Hong Kong adolescents
International Journal of Behavioral Development, January 1, 2007; 31(1): 19 - 27.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of SociologyHome page
X. Zang
Social resources, class habitus and friendship ties in urban China
Journal of Sociology, March 1, 2006; 42(1): 79 - 92.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Work and OccupationsHome page
C. HAKIM
Lifestyle Preferences as Determinants of Women's Differentiated Labor Market Careers
Work and Occupations, November 1, 2002; 29(4): 428 - 459.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.