1981
DOI: 10.2307/2095083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interlocking Directorates and Interest Group Formation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
70
0
14

Year Published

1991
1991
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 153 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
70
0
14
Order By: Relevance
“…The idea that some groups or organizations have core/periphery structures has enjoyed considerable attention in social network analysis (e.g., Mintz and Schwartz 1981, Barsky 1999, Cummings and Cross 2003. To illustrate this idea, consider Figure 1.…”
Section: Core/periphery Social Network Position Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idea that some groups or organizations have core/periphery structures has enjoyed considerable attention in social network analysis (e.g., Mintz and Schwartz 1981, Barsky 1999, Cummings and Cross 2003. To illustrate this idea, consider Figure 1.…”
Section: Core/periphery Social Network Position Andmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While Thomas Koenig (1979) was the first scholar to adopt this line of enquiry, Beth Mintz and Michael Schwartz picked up the issue in the early 1980s and published an influential article on interlocks and interest group formation (Mintz and Schwartz 1981). Later, Mark Mizruchi worked with Tom Koenig on the impact of interlocks on corporate donations to political parties and candidacies (Mizruchi and Koenig 1986).…”
Section: How the Business Schools Took Over In The Usamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies of affiliation networks, like interlocking directorship (Mintz and Schwartz 1981), and voluntary organizations (McPherson, and Smith-Lovin, 1987), all conceptualize an affiliation network in terms of a set of actors and a set of social occasions or events (Wasserman and Faust 1994). Events or focuses are largely viewed as a method of classification and categorization rather than as actors which can be specifically analyzed and whose actions affect the value of affiliation.…”
Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%