Search results

As a network analyst, I am fascinated by social interactions. The ways in which people connect with one another and exercise power and authority by deploying different forms of capital. This piece returns to the underlying and changing kinship network structure of the village of Ambridge over time, explores the role of ‘kin-keeping’ as deployed by the matriarchs Peggy and Jill. I am most interested in the ways in which gender as performed by the women of the village intersects with abundance or lack of other forms of capital, and how far inequalities persist and why. It is clear that there is an intergenerational power dynamic at play in the spreading or hoarding of the various dimensions of power layered together and how forms of capital intersect for protection or precarity. Social and cultural capital at birth in the village is defining in terms of both ‘serious’ life outcomes as well as how more minor infractions and foibles are viewed. Further, I return to discuss how my various network-based predictions have fared over time. The Headlam Hypothesis and the fate of Ed Grundy – King of Ambridge are revisited and their durability explored.

Across the United States (US), COVID-19 vaccination coverage was lower in rural counties compared to urban counties, exacerbating rural health inequities. While rural communities fall short of the public health goal to vaccinate all who are eligible, most rural residents have chosen to vaccinate for COVID-19. The aim of this study was to better understand rural New Mexicans' attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 vaccines.

We conducted and analyzed 51 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with adults living in rural New Mexican counties, covering a range of topics related to the pandemic, including vaccines. These interviews were conducted in the Summer of 2021 after the vaccines were widely available to all adults over the age of 18 and youth between the ages of 12–17, but not yet available for children under 12 years.

Two major perspectives were identified: (1) the idea that COVID-19 vaccinations are a tool that individuals can use to achieve freedom and protection and (2) the view which regarded vaccines as an infringement of personal rights and one's autonomy of health. For people who viewed the vaccine as a tool for freedom, several themes emerged, including (1) a preference for vaccine manufacturers, specifically a preference for Pfizer, and (2) frustrations related to vaccine access, specifically, older adults expressed frustrations with the difficulty of scheduling vaccination appointments. However, most participants felt as though they had enough vaccination resources. For people who viewed vaccines (and vaccine mandates) as limiting their freedom, additional themes emerged: (1) overarching distrust of government and the perception that vaccines were an extension of government and (2) distrust in the vaccines themselves, including a perceived lack of research on the vaccines and a perception that the vaccine was developed in too short of a period. Some of the people who hold these beliefs are also vaccinated. We draw from social psychology theories to better understand how people who hold a rural identity come to establish different beliefs and practices compared to larger metropolitan regions. While political identity is a contributor, of our participants, the group who were most likely to report not being vaccinated were the “independent” or “unaffiliated voters.” Our findings can help craft culturally responsive vaccine initiatives for rural communities.