Social selection and psychological distress in a sober active community: a longitudinal social network analysis

Purpose This study aims to investigate the coevolution of supportive social ties and psychological distress within The Phoenix, a sober active community. It also aims to disentangle two concurrent processes: whether psychological distress influences the formation of social ties (social selection) or whether peer relationships influence individual distress levels (social influence) over time. Design/methodology/approach Longitudinal social network data were collected from members of The Phoenix in Denver and Wichita (n = 23) across two waves separated by one year. This study used the Simulation Investigation for Empirical Network Analysis (SIENA) framework to simultaneously model structural network dynamics and changes in psychological distress. Findings Network ties were characterized by reciprocity and clustering. A significant negative selection effect was identified (PE = −0.37, p < 0.05): members with lower psychological distress were more likely to be nominated as supportive partners, while those with higher distress were less likely to be selected. No evidence of peer influence on psychological distress was observed over the one-year period. Research limitations/implications Limitations include small network sizes and a two-wave design, which restricted model complexity. Future research should incorporate additional waves, larger networks and mixed-method approaches to capture nuanced changes in mental health and social integration. Practical implications Findings suggest that members with higher psychological distress are less likely to be selected as supportive ties, potentially isolating those most in need of connection. “Structured socialization” strategies, such as assigned mentorships or care circles, could be implemented to proactively integrate members with higher distress levels who might otherwise be filtered out by the community’s selection mechanisms. Social implications While recovery communities provide vital protection, they can also function as exclusionary structures. To ensure equitable access to recovery capital, communities must adopt intentional strategies that mitigate social stratification based on mental health status. Originality/value This study addresses a gap in recovery literature by using longitudinal network analysis to separate selection from influence. It provides empirical evidence that mental health status drives social connectivity in recovery settings, rather than connectedness simply improving mental health.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Mental Health and Social Inclusion
Published
2026-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/mhsi-01-2026-0034
Primary Topic
Health disparities and outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Social selection and psychological distress in a sober active community: a longitudinal social network analysis

Shuqi Nie, Zhenning Kang, Katie M. Heinrich, S. Y. Chung et al.
Mental Health and Social Inclusion
Health disparities and outcomes
article

Social selection and psychological distress in a sober active community: a longitudinal social network analysis

Shuqi Nie, Zhenning Kang, Katie M. Heinrich, S. Y. Chung, Lindsey Breunig-Rodriguez, Megan S. Patterson, Tyler Prochnow, Katelyn A. Murphy, Izzabella Guerrero
article en

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate the coevolution of supportive social ties and psychological distress within The Phoenix, a sober active community. It also aims to disentangle two concurrent processes: whether psychological distress influences the formation of social ties (social selection) or whether peer relationships influence individual distress levels (social influence) over time. Design/methodology/approach Longitudinal social network data were collected from members of The Phoenix in Denver and Wichita (n = 23) across two waves separated by one year. This study used the Simulation Investigation for Empirical Network Analysis (SIENA) framework to simultaneously model structural network dynamics and changes in psychological distress. Findings Network ties were characterized by reciprocity and clustering. A significant negative selection effect was identified (PE = −0.37, p < 0.05): members with lower psychological distress were more likely to be nominated as supportive partners, while those with higher distress were less likely to be selected. No evidence of peer influence on psychological distress was observed over the one-year period. Research limitations/implications Limitations include small network sizes and a two-wave design, which restricted model complexity. Future research should incorporate additional waves, larger networks and mixed-method approaches to capture nuanced changes in mental health and social integration. Practical implications Findings suggest that members with higher psychological distress are less likely to be selected as supportive ties, potentially isolating those most in need of connection. “Structured socialization” strategies, such as assigned mentorships or care circles, could be implemented to proactively integrate members with higher distress levels who might otherwise be filtered out by the community’s selection mechanisms. Social implications While recovery communities provide vital protection, they can also function as exclusionary structures. To ensure equitable access to recovery capital, communities must adopt intentional strategies that mitigate social stratification based on mental health status. Originality/value This study addresses a gap in recovery literature by using longitudinal network analysis to separate selection from influence. It provides empirical evidence that mental health status drives social connectivity in recovery settings, rather than connectedness simply improving mental health.

Mental Health and Social InclusionVol. 30(7)
Texas A&M University System (US), Kansas State University (US), Texas College (US), Texas A&M Health Science Center (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Health disparities and outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.