Rethinking Homophily and Its Limits to Reconsider the Possibilities of Heterophily

In response to the ever-diversifying social landscape and the pursuit of equality and conviviality, the social sciences—particularly social psychology—have made intergroup relations a prominent field of study. This research consistently demonstrates that individuals tend to form friendships with those similar to themselves—a phenomenon known as friendship homophily—across major social divisions (e.g., gender) and behavioral characteristics (e.g., academic dispositions). A critical review of ethno-racial homophily, however, reveals that despite the tendency to befriend individuals of the same ethno-racial group, ethnicity and race may not be as determinative as commonly assumed. Expanding on this critique, our understanding of intergroup relations could—and perhaps must—be radically revised. Homophily may be a more powerful relational principle than current findings suggest, due to a bias introduced by the uncritical reliance on categorical or "objective" identities rather than processes of socialization and identification. This reliance distorts our understanding of homophily. Instead, I propose a cultural sociology of homophily, which views it as structured by both objective relations in social space and by boundary work enacted through empirical relations. A post-Bourdieusian framework further highlights the central role of context in shaping which similarities become relevant in situated relations and which do not. By reframing homophily, we can better grasp both its power and its limits. Concurrently, the study of heterophilous relations remains a glaring gap in the literature. Some heterophilious relations may in fact be “false positives,” misclassified due to overlooked similarities. Others, to the contrary, may offer insights into the conditions under and the ways through which heterophily can prosper. Hence, I conclude the critique on homophily by briefly introducing concepts such as outgroup orientation, convivial disposition, and familiarity (extending the notion of similarity) as processes that make difference attractive, allowing us to imagine the long-neglected possibilities of heterophily.