Table 1 Typology of social networks among asylum-seekers

Formal versus informal networks [28, 35, 72]

Formal: ties established within the workplace or within institutions (e.g., medical providers, social workers, etc.)

Informal: ties formed among family, personal friends, and acquaintances

Vertical versus horizontal networks [56, 58]

Vertical: bonds formed with members of different socio-economic statuses, interests, backgrounds or other categories

Horizontal: bonds formed with members of similar socio-economic statuses, interests, backgrounds or other categories

Heterogenous versus homogeneous networks [11]

Heterogeneous: ties composed of people from different cultural backgrounds and/or asylum-seeker status

Homogeneous: ties between individuals of similar cultural backgrounds and/or asylum-seeker status

Weak vs. strong networks [11, 58, 72]

Weak: ties that do not stem into further, deeper relationships

Strong: composed of individuals with strong and everlasting relationships

Transnational networks versus local networks [23, 57]

Transnational: relationships between members across country borders, which are frequently between asylum-seekers and relatives/kinships from their home country

Local: relationships between members within the same country/community, can be relationships among asylum-seekers and relationships between asylum-seekers and other members of the community

Dense versus loose networks [4, 67]

Dense: Networks with a large quantity of social ties, which tend to be small and stable communities with few external contacts and a high degree of social cohesion

Loose: Networks with a small quantity of social ties, which tend to be large and unstable communities that have many external contacts and exhibit a relative lack of social cohesion