The Structure of Communication Networks Matters: How Network Diversity, Centrality, and Context Influence Political Ambivalence, Participation, and Knowledge

More Is Less? The Curvilinear Effects of Political Ties on Corporate Innovation Performance

“…Secondly, political ties could bring more resources from government for corporate innovation development (Hillman & Hitt, 1999). Firms with strong political ties are more competent in receiving more financial resources (Song & Eveland, 2015). The additional resources obtained from political ties could be used for innovation development and therefore, enhance corporate innovation performance.…”

Uncovering the Structural Underpinnings of Political Discussion Networks: Evidence From an Exponential Random Graph Model

“…Over the decades since the Columbia School scholars' seminal study of voting behavior (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, ), communication scholarship has established a strong theoretical and empirical relationship between political discussions and their outcomes, such as political knowledge (Eveland & Hively, ; Kim, Wyatt, & Katz, ) or the quality of one's opinion (Cappella, Price, & Nir, ). Recent advances in political discussion studies have revealed that certain structural properties of discussion networks—such as exposure to disagreement (Mutz, ; Scheufele, Hardy, Brossard, Waismel‐Manor, & Nisbet, ), diversity of discussions (Eveland & Hively, ; Nir, ), network size (Eveland, Hutchens, & Morey, ), density (Eveland, Hutchens, & Morey, ), or network positions (Song & Eveland, in press)—are directly responsible for producing certain democratic outcomes, above and beyond the effect of simple political discussion frequency (Eveland & Hively, ; Song & Eveland, in press).…”

“…While those advancements suggest that structural properties of discussion networks matter (Song & Eveland, in press), relatively little attention has been devoted to the antecedents of such structural properties of discussion networks. If such structural properties are directly responsible for producing certain democratic outcomes, then what factors give rise to such patterns?…”

“…This line of theorizing emphasizes the fact that political discussions inadvertently arise during people's mundane, nonpurposive everyday interactions, or from the process of discussion itself (Kim & Kim, ; Mansbridge, ; Walsh, ; Wyatt, Katz, & Kim, ). Also, this approach suggests that network properties have unique advantages over other domains of explanatory variables (Eveland & Hively, ; Lazer, Rubineau, Chetkovich, Katz, & Neblo, ; Song & Eveland, in press). Given this, it is essential to consider more nuanced understandings of various antecedents that give rise to political discussion networks.…”

Poder, Centralidade E Embeddedness Como Mecanismos Para Aumentar a Eficiência De Captura Do Conhecimento Das Subsidiárias Em Suas Redes Locais

“…Centralidade usualmente está relacionada ao número de conexões diretas e indiretas que um determinado ator possui (PROVAN et al, 2007;DAS et al, 2018), e mede em algum grau a dependência estrutural entre atores. Em geral, as pesquisas sobre centralidade estão relacionadas ao comportamento ou reputação dos atores, e raramente são voltadas ao acesso ao conhecimento (SHIJAKU et al, 2018;SONG;EVELAND, 2015). Ademais, outras fontes de poder, como atributos pessoais e organizacionais, tais como formação, atividade profissional, prestígio e reputação, e a posição formal do ator dentro da rede, por exemplo, influência, conselhos, suporte, comunicação têm impacto na centralidade da rede e no exercício do poder (TSAI, 2001;MEO et al, 2017;CHANDLER et al, 2013).…”