2.1.2. Social Network Variables

The Practitioner Assessment of Network Type (PANT) described by Wenger was employed to ascertain the social network types of participants [8,13]. The construct validity of Wenger’s social network typology was tested and validated in an Indian setting [14]. The questionnaire includes the following eight questions:

How far away does your nearest relative live? 0 (no relatives); 1 (with 1.6 km/same home); 2 (1.5–9.6 km); 3 (9.7–25.7 km); 4 (25.8–80.5 km); 5 (above 80.5 km)

Where does your nearest sister or brother live? 0 (no siblings); 1(with 1.6 km/same home); 2 (1.5–9.6 km); 3 (9.7–25.7 km); 4 (25.8–80.5 km); 5 (above 80.5 km)

Where does your nearest child live? 0 (no child); 1(with 1.6 km/same home); 2 (1.5–9.6 km); 3 (9.7–25.7 km); 4 (25.8–80.5 km); 5 (above 80.5 km)

How often do you see any of your children or relatives to speak to? 0 (never); 1 (daily); 2 (2–3 times a week); 3 (at least weekly); 4 (at least monthly); 5 (less often)

How often do you have a chat or do something with one of your friends? 0 (never); 1 (daily); 2 (2–3 times a week); 3 (at least weekly); 4 (at least monthly); 5 (less often)

How often do you see any of your neighbours to have a chat or do something with? 0 (never); 1 (daily); 2 (2–3 times a week); 3 (at least weekly); 4 (at least monthly); 5 (less often)

Do you attend religious meetings/visit religious places? 0 (no); 1 (yes, regularly); 2 (yes, occasionally)

Do you attend meetings of any community or groups such as clubs, lectures or anything like that? 0 (no); 1 (yes, regularly); 2 (yes, occasionally)

Five network typologies, namely family-dependent, locally integrated, locally self-contained, wider community-focused and private restricted types, are described based on participant responses to the above questions. The five network types in detail include:

A family-dependent network type is a network type predominantly characterised by (a) a relative living within a 1.6 km radius; (b) a child and/or sibling living within a radius of 9.6 km; (c) frequent contact with a relative (daily or 2–3 times a week); (d) limited contacts with friends or neighbours (never, less often or at least monthly); (e) and occasional attendance to religious meeting and community clubs.

A locally integrated network type is characterised by (a) close proximity with a relative (living within the same house, within a radius of 9.6 km and/or within 25.7 km); (b) a child and/or sibling living close (within the same house, within a radius 9.6 km and/or a radius of 25.7 km); (c) very frequent contact with a relative (daily and/or 2–3 times a week); (d) frequent contacts with neighbours and/or friends (daily, 2–3 times a week and/or at least weekly); (e) regular attendance at religious meetings and community clubs.

A locally self-contained network type is characterised by (a) an arm’s length proximity with relatives (living within a radius of 25.7 km and/or a radius of 80.5 km), children (no child, a child living within a radius of 25.7 km and/or a radius of 80.5 km) and siblings (living within a radius of 9.6 km and/or 25.7 km and/or 80.5 km); (b) occasional contact with relatives (at least weekly and/or at least monthly) and neighbours (at least weekly and/or at least monthly); (c) limited contact with friends (less often and/or at least monthly) and (d) occasional attendance at religious meetings and/or community clubs.

A wider community focused network type is network type predominantly characterised by (a) absence of a relative (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above), child (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above or a sibling (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above; (b) limited contacts with relatives (less often and/or at least monthly); (c) occasional contacts with neighbours (at least weekly and/or at least monthly); (d) very frequent contact with friends (daily, 2–3 times a week and/or at least weekly) and regular attendance at clubs and religious meetings.

A private restricted network is characterised by (a) lack of relatives (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above), child (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above) or siblings (living within a radius of 80.5 km or above); (b) minimal contact with relatives, friends or neighbours (less often) and (c) no involvement in religious meetings or clubs.

Physical proximity and frequency of communication are two important factors used by Wenger to identify the social networks in the PANT Social network questionnaire. Proximity is a fundamental way for people to connect, as a person tends to approach someone close to them rather than someone distant in the hour of need [25]. This is especially true in India, where the likelihood of travelling considerable distances are limited due to several reasons including limited public/private transport, poor and narrow roads, heavy traffic or rising fuel costs [26]. The exact algorithm used to construct the network variable has been described in detail in another study [13].

Private restricted social network characterised by little involvement in activities or relationships are identified as nonintegrated social networks. In contrast, social networks with good relationships and/or involvement in activities are identified as integrated social networks.