Mixed Methods for Research on Support Networks of People Experiencing Chronic Illness and Social Marginalization.

Substantial research has focused on how social networks help individuals navigate the illness experience. Sociologists have begun to theorize beyond the binary of strong and weak social network ties (e.g., compartmental, elastic, and disposable ties), citing the social, economic, and health conditions that shape their formation. However, limited research has employed mixed social network methods, which we argue is especially critical for examining the "non-traditional" social support networks of marginalized individuals. We employ quantitative social network methods (i.e., the egocentric network approach) in addition to in-depth interviews and observations, with a novel tool for capturing network data about social groups, to surface these kinds of supportive relationships. Using the case of "nameless ties"-non-kin, non-provider ties who were unidentifiable by given name or were grouped by context or activity rather than individually distinguished-we show how mixed social network methods can illuminate supporters who are commonly overlooked when only using traditional social network analysis. We conclude with a proposal for mixed methods and group alter approaches to successfully observe liminal support ties that is ideal for research about individuals experiencing chronic disability, poverty, housing insecurity, and other forms of social marginalization.

Pandemic Precarity: COVID-19's Impact on Mexican and Central American Immigrant Families.

Objective: The study examines the association of gender, parenthood, and marriage with reports of perceived pandemic precarity among Mexican and Central American immigrants during the COVID-19 pandemic (Fall 2020) to understand predictors of vulnerability in periods of crisis. Background: Latinos/as, immigrants, parents, and women have faced significant challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Family structure, along with social expectations for gender (i.e., self-sacrificing femininity for women and hegemonic masculinity for men), parenthood, and marriage may explain perceptions of pandemic precarity - defined as the material deprivation and economic anxiety resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: This study used data from the Hispanic COVID-19 Rapid Response Study (n=400), a follow-up of the VidaSana Study of Mexican and Central American immigrants, to examine how family structure is associated with pandemic precarity (i.e., food, housing, and economic insecurity). Using linear regression models, average marginal effects (AMEs), and tests for group differences we investigate the independent and interactive effects of gender, parenthood, and marriage on pandemic precarity. Results: Men and parents reported the highest pandemic precarity. Fathers reported higher pandemic precarity than mothers. For men, marriage is associated with greater precarity, and for women, marriage is associated with less precarity, yet marriage increased precarity for those without children. Conclusion: We discuss the importance and implications of examining gender along with family structure to understand how immigrant families were faring in response to the pandemic.

COVID-19 and changes in college student educational expectations and health by disability status.

This study examines the implications of the coronavirus pandemic for college students' health and education, with special attention to variation by disability status. Disaster research supports the hypothesis that students with disabilities will experience higher-than-usual levels of pandemic-related stress, which could lead to re-evaluations of their educational expectations and declines in health. We evaluate this hypothesis by modeling changes in students' (1) mental and physical health and (2) educational expectations during the first year (spring of 2020 to spring of 2021) of the pandemic, using survey data collected from a population-based sample of college students in the state of Indiana. Although we observe across-the-board declines in both domains, students with disabilities were especially vulnerable. Mediation analyses suggest that differential exposure to financial and illness-related stressors is partially to blame, explaining a significant portion of the group differences between students with and without disabilities. We interpret these results as evidence of the unique vulnerabilities associated with disability status and its wide-ranging importance as a dimension of social stratification.

Labeling, causal attributions, and social network ties to people with mental illness.

Evidence supports Allport's (1954) contention that social contact reduces mental illness stigma and promotes symptom recognition. However, an important limitation of existing research is that it typically relies on relatively simplistic measures of contact (e.g., any contact, number of contacts). Here, we build on prior work by examining how contact with persons with mental illness within social networks shapes labeling processes and beliefs about the causes of mental illness. Using egocentric network methods and vignette data from the 2018 General Social Survey (N = 1173), findings reveal that connections to valued ties (e.g., friends, family) that disconfirm commonly held stereotypes about people with mental illness contribute to improved recognition of mental illness and reduce the likelihood of endorsing stigmatizing beliefs about causes of mental illness. By using network theory and methods, this research extends current understanding of the role of contact by revealing not only whether contact matters, but how it matters and under what circumstances it may reduce prejudice and discrimination attached to mental illness in contemporary society.