Social network analysis in criminology views social relationships in terms of network theory, consisting of nodes (representing individual actors within the network) and ties (which represent relationships between the individuals, such as offender movement, sub offenders, crime groups, etc.). These networks are often depicted in a social network diagram, where nodes are represented as vertices and ties are represented as edges.

Known scholars of social network analysis include Gisela Bichler, Lucia Summers, Carlo Morselli, Aili Malm, Jean McGloin, Jerzy Sarnecki, Diane Haynie, Andrew Papachristos, Mangai Natarajan, Francesco Calderoni, and David Bright.

A case study of an illegal drug importation network, monitored by law-enforcement over a period of two years, revealed "how legitimate world actors contribute to structuring a criminal network."^[2] It revealed "a minority of these actors were critical to the network in two ways: (1) they were active in bringing other participants (including traffickers) into the network; and (2) they were influential directors of relationships with both non-traffickers and traffickers."^[2]

Malm and Bichler have also analyzed an illicit drugs commodity chain by identifying where collaborating actors who are located within the chain that links the raw materials to the market absorption, to understand how illicit markets function.^[3] The created network captures the roles, functions, and structures of the groups involved in the illicit drug commodity chain and reveals the links in the supply chain (i.e. source, supply, sales, and feeders). The resiliency is determined by assessing the clusters in subgroups, identifying pivotal individuals holding central positions, and quantifying the potential to disrupt commodity and information flow by identifying the specific nodes to be removed for maximum effect.^[3]

The application of social network analysis during the collaboration between criminals and terrorists when both use smuggling tunnels was explored by Lichtenwald and Perri.^[4] Lichtenwald and Perri referenced many of the notable scholars and key papers in the field.^{[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]}

Explaining the linkage between urban planning and crime patterns, Brantingham^[13][14] argues that four factors – accessibility through high-volume transportation conduits, placement, juxtaposition, and the operation of facilities – can account for the criminogenic capacity of specific places.^[15]

An individual's spatial awareness emerges from the routine travel to and from activity nodes (i.e. work, school, shopping, and recreation sites). This spatial awareness influences their behavior; offenders operate within their familiar settings, which are learned as the delinquent travels between activity nodes along constant paths. "Recent efforts to enhance journey-to-crime research: examine intraurban criminal migration using travel demand models; explore spatial-temporal constraints posed by routine activities; investigate how co-offending dynamics impact target selection; describe the journey away from crime sites; scrutinize subgroup variation; and assess the utility of distance decay models".^[16]

• Social network analysis software