Ties That Bind

A Social Network Approach to Understanding Student Integration and Persistence Introduction Astin's (1993, P. 398) claim that peers are "the single most potent source of influence" in the lives of college students comes after decades of theoretical and empirical research examining the integrative nature of student experiences on the college campus. Review of the classic work of Newcomb (1943, 1962) and Newcomb and Wilson (1966), or the more contemporary observations of Horowitz (1987) or Moffatt (1989) demonstrates why student peer culture plays such a central contextual role in the understanding of a variety of college outcomes (e.g., Antrobus, Dobbelaer, & Salzinger, 1988; Chickering, 1974; Husband, 1976; Nora & Rendon, 1990; Stage, 1989; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1977). One outcome theorized to be dramatically affected by student peer culture is persistence. Much of the student persistence literature places great emphasis on student integration into campus subcultures (Spady, 1971; Tinto, 1993). Two major comprehensive conceptual models of student persistence have emerged from the various theoretical perspectives on this phenomenon, Bean's Student Attrition Model (1980, 1982, 1983, 1990) and Tinto's Student Integration Model (1975, 1987, 1993). Although Tinto's integration model places a greater emphasis on the role of within-institution peer culture than Bean's organizational model, which emphasizes the role that external forces play in the persistence process, considerable overlap exists between the two, especially in terms of the role of organizational factors and commitment to the institution (Cabrera, Casteneda, Nora, & Hengstler, 1992). In both models, student commitment to the institution is theorized to be affected by peers' attitudes and pressures. Bean theorizes that among other potential modifiers, the encouragement of close friends may enhance a sense of commitment to the institution (institutional fit and quality). Tinto postulates a similar relationship, namely that the higher the level of social integration the greater will be the commitment to the institution. As integration is the central feature of the Tinto model it has therefore been carefully elaborated both conceptually and empirically. This should not discount the theoretical role of social structure in Bean's model, for friendships, or social ties, are presumed to impact the extent of students' shared group values, support structure, and affinity for the institution in both models--simply in different ways. As many have pointed out, the operational measurement of the manifold dimensions of peer culture is often elusive. Adequate measurement of the effects of these important influences requires knowledge of students' individual group identifications as well as their desires for group affiliation, membership, and, ultimately, acceptance (Astin, 1993; Kuh, 1995; Newcomb, 1943, 1962; Newcomb & Wilson, 1966). The purpose of this study is to begin to explore such subcultural effects by assessing the role of student social structure in the persistence process. Specifically, I explore the effects of social integration from a social network perspective: a perspective that enables determination of subgroup membership and of the characteristics of relationships to and within those subgroups. My concern in this article is to take a first step toward a more appropriate empirical elaboration of the integration constructs central to these models. Accordingly, this study is exploratory in nature and is designed to examine the effects of structural integration on factors theorized to be central in the persistence process. Of the two major theories of student persistence, Tinto's Student Integration Model (1993) will be used as the framework for the development of a method that will enable the specification of a model incorporating a number of social network characteristics. Although similarities exist between Bean's and Tinto's theories, especially in terms of the posited relationships between integration and persistence, the Tinto model was chosen as a framework due to its particular theoretical underpinning and the large volume of work explicating is theory. …