No abstract

Actors and associates often match on a few dimensions that matter most for the relationship at hand. In so doing, they are exposed to unanticipated social influences because counterparts have broader attitudes and preferences than would-be contacts considered when they first chose to pair. The authors label as "partially deliberate" social matching that occurs on a small set of attributes, and they present empirical methods for identifying causal social influence effects when relationships follow this generative logic. A data set tracking the training and professional activities of academic biomedical scientists is used to show that young scientists adopt their advisers' orientations toward commercial science as evidenced by adviser-to-advisee transmission of patenting behavior. The authors demonstrate this in twostage models that account for the endogeneity of matching, using both inverse probability of treatment weights and an instrumental variables approach. They also draw on qualitative methods to support a causal interpretation. Overall, they present a theory and a triangulation of methods to establish evidence of social influence when tie formation is partially deliberate.

We examine the role that geography plays in structuring interactions within an organizational setting designed to promote broad patterns of interaction: the organizational forum. We propose that, within a forum, an individual's location structures his or her access to peer support, but individuals with power (i.e., those who control the flow of organizational resources) can transcend these geographic constraints. We examine these propositions with data collected on strategic actors in the U.S. Senate Chamber. Using a dyad fixed effects approach, time‐varying controls, selection‐on‐observables estimation, and quasi‐exogenous shocks to seating arrangements, we find support for our propositions. These results contribute to our understanding of strategic interaction patterns, with an emphasis on the geographic scaffold upon which strategic actions are constructed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

What qualities make a political leader more influential or less influential? Philosophers, political scientists, and psychologists have puzzled over this question, positing two opposing routes to political power--one driven by human virtues, such as courage and wisdom, and the other driven by vices, such as Machiavellianism and psychopathy. By coding nonverbal behaviors displayed in political speeches, we assessed the virtues and vices of 151 U.S. senators. We found that virtuous senators became more influential after they assumed leadership roles, whereas senators who displayed behaviors consistent with vices--particularly psychopathy--became no more influential or even less influential after they assumed leadership roles. Our results inform a long-standing debate about the role of morality and ethics in leadership and have important implications for electing effective government officials. Citizens would be wise to consider a candidate's virtue in casting their votes, which might increase the likelihood that elected officials will have genuine concern for their constituents and simultaneously promote cooperation and progress in government.