Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance.

Structural (or network) analysis has mystified many scientists. Some have rejected it as mere methodology, which lacks due regard for substantive issues. Some have fled from its unusual terms and techniques, not having played with blocks and graphs since grammar school. Some have dismissed one portion for the whole, saying, for example, that their study of class structure has little need for the focus on friendship ties emphasized in analysis. And some have scorned it as nothing new, claiming that they also study social structure. Others have bolted on variables such as density as they would a turbocharger in order to boost explained variance. Still others, attracted by the capability of studying nonhierarchical, nongroup structures, have expanded structural analysis into a ideology that advocates egalitarian, open communities. Some have even used network as a verb and networking as a noun to advocate the deliberate creation and use of networks for such desired ends as getting jobs or integrating communities. These misconceptions have arisen because too many analysts and