Close Encounters: Analyzing How Social Similarity and Propinquity Contribute to Strong Network Connections

References

• Ambady N., Shih M., Kim A., Pittinksy T. L. Stereotype susceptibility in children: Effects of identity activation on quantitative performance. Psych. Sci. (2001) 12(5):385–390Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C. P., Spataro S. E., Thomas-Hunt M. C. Misperceiving your place: Humility and hubris in social hierarchies. Status and Groups: Research on Managing Groups and Teams (2005) 7(JAI Press, Stamford, CT) 69–92Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bacharach S. B., Bamberger P. A., Vashdi D. Diversity and homophily at work: Supportive relations among white and African American peers. Acad. Management J. (2005) 48(4):619–644Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bielby W. T., Baron J. N. Men and women at work: Sex segregation and statistical discrimination. Amer. J. Sociol. (1986) 91(4):759–799Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau P. M., Schwartz J. E.Crosscutting Social Circles: Testing a Macrostructural Theory of Intergroup Relations (1984) (Academic Press, Orlando, FL) Google Scholar
• Brass D. J. Men's and women's networks: A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Acad. Management J. (1985) 28(2):327–343Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brewer M. B. The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. (1991) 17(5):475–482Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brewer M. B., Kramer R. M. The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Annual Rev. Psych. (1985) 36:219–243Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt R. S. Measuring age as a structural concept. Soc. Networks (1991) 13(1):1–34Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrne D.The Attraction Paradigm (1971) (Academic Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Caldeira G. A., Patterson S. C. Political friendship in legislature. J. Politics (1987) 49(4):953–975Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carley K. M., Krackhardt D. Cognitive inconsistencies and non-symmetric friendship. Soc. Networks (1996) 18(1):1–27Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatman J. A., Polzer J. T., Barsade S. G., Neale M. A. Being different yet feeling similar: The influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1998) 43(4):749–780Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denrell J. Why most people disapprove of me: Experience sampling in impression formation. Psych. Rev. (2005) 112(4):951–978Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duguid M. M., Loyd D. L., Tolbert P. S. The impact of categorical status, numeric representation, and work group prestige on preference for demographically similar others: A value threat approach. Organ. Sci. (2010) . ePub ahead of print August 30, http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/content/abstract/orsc.1100.0565v1Google Scholar
• Feld S. L. Social structural determinants of similarity among associates. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1982) 47(6):797–801Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feld S. L. The structured use of personal associates. Soc. Forces (1984) 62:640–652Crossref, Google Scholar
• Festinger L., Schachter S., Bach K.Social Processes in Informal Groups (1950) (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA) Google Scholar
• Gibbons D. E. Friendship and advice networks in the context of changing professional values. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2004) 49(2):238–262Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grieve P. G., Hogg M. A. Subjective uncertainty and intergroup discrimination in the minimal group situation. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. (1999) 25(8):926–940Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan M. T., Pólos L., Carroll G. R.Logics of Organization Theory: Audiences, Codes and Ecologies (2007) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) Google Scholar
• Harrison D. A., Klein K. J. What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety or disparity in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. (2007) 32(4):1199–1228Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison D. A., Price K. H., Bell M. P. Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Acad. Management J. (1998) 41(1):96–107Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hewstone M., Rubin M., Willis H. Intergroup bias. Annual Rev. Psych. (2002) 53:575–604Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A.The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social Identity (1992) (Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, UK) Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A. Group cohesiveness: A critical review and some new directions. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psych. (1993) 4:85–111Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A., Hains S. C. Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1996) 70(2):295–309Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A., Hardie E. A. Social attraction, personal attraction and self-categorization: A field study. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. (1991) 17(2):175–180Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A., Turner J. C. Interpersonal attraction, social identification, and psychological group formation. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. (1985) 15(1):51–66Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogg M. A., Hardie E. A., Reynolds K. J. Prototypical similarity, self-categorization, and depersonalized attraction: A perspective on group cohesiveness. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. (1995) 25(2):159–177Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H. Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1992) 37(3):422–447Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H. Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Acad. Management J. (1995) 38(3):673–703Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H. Paving an alternative route: Gender differences in managerial networks. Soc. Psych. Quart. (1997) 60(1):91–102Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H., Kilduff M., Tsai W. Zooming in and out: Individuals and collectives at the new frontiers for organizational network research. Organ. Sci. (2005) 16(4, Part 1):359–371Link, Google Scholar
• Ingram P., Morris M. W. Do people mix at mixers? Structure, homophily, and the “life of the party”. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2007) 52(4):558–585Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kane A. A., Argote L., Levine J. M. Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (2005) 96(1):56–71Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter R. M.Men and Women of the Corporation (1977) (Basic Books, New York) Google Scholar
• Lau D. C., Murnighan J. K. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Acad. Management Rev. (1998) 23(2):325–340Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laumann E. O.Prestige and Association in an Urban Community (1966) (Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis) Google Scholar
• Laumann E. O.Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks (1973) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Lawrence B. S. Organizational reference groups: A missing perspective on social context. Organ. Sci. (2006) 17(1):80–100Link, Google Scholar
• Marsden P. V. Core discussion networks of Americans. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1987) 52(1):122–131Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden P. V. Homogeneity in confiding relationships. Soc. Networks (1988) 10(1):57–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden P. V., Campbell K. E. Measuring tie strength. Soc. Forces (1984) 63(2):482–501Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson J. M., Smith-Lovin L. Sex segregation in voluntary associations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1986) 51(1):61–79Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson J. M., Smith-Lovin L. Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1987) 52(3):370–379Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson J. M., Smith-Lovin L., Cook J. M. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. (2001) 27:415–444Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A., Kilduff M., Brass D. J. At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups. Acad. Management J. (1998) 41(4):441–452Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mollica K. A., Gray B., Trevino L. K. Racial homophily and its persistence in newcomers' social networks. Organ. Sci. (2003) 14(2):123–136Link, Google Scholar
• Moody J. Race, school integration, and friendship segregation in America. Amer. J. Sociol. (2001) 107(3):679–716Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mouw T., Entwisle B. Residential segregation and interracial friendship in schools. Amer. J. Sociol. (2006) 112(2):394–441Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mullen B. Operationalizing the effect of the group on the individual: A self-attention perspective. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. (1983) 19(4):295–322Crossref, Google Scholar
• O'Reilly C. A., Caldwell D. F., Barnett W. P. Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1989) 34(1):21–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettigrew T. F. Intergroup contact theory. Annual Rev. Psych. (1998) 49:65–85Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips K. W. The effects of categorically based expectations on minority influence: The importance of congruence. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. (2003) 29(1):3–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips K. W., Loyd D. L. When surface and deep-level diversity collide: The effects on dissenting group members. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (2006) 99(2):143–160Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabe-Hesketh S., Skrondal A.Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata (2005) (STATA Press, College Station, TX) Google Scholar
• Reagans R. Preferences, identity, and competition: Predicting tie strength from demographic data. Management Sci. (2005) 51(9):1374–1383Link, Google Scholar
• Schneider B. The people make the place. Personnel Psych. (1987) 40(3):437–453Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrum W., Cheek N. H., Hunter S. M. Friendship in school: Gender and racial homophily. Sociol. Ed. (1988) 61(4):227–239Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tafjel H., Turner J. C., Austin W. G., Worchel S. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (1979) (Brooks-Cole, Monterey, CA) 33–47Google Scholar
• Troop L. R. Perceived discrimination and interracial contact: Predicting interracial closeness among black and white Americans. Soc. Psych. Quart. (2007) 70(1):70–81Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsui A. S., Gutek B. A.Demographic Differences in Organizations: Current Research and Future Directions (1999) (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA) Google Scholar
• Tsui A. S., Egan T. D., O'Reilly C. A. Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1992) 37(4):549–579Crossref, Google Scholar
• Turner J. C., Lawler E. J. Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. Advances in Group Processes (1985) 2(JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 77–122Google Scholar
• Turner J. C.Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (1987) (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, UK) Google Scholar
• Wasserman S., Faust K.Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (1994) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yamaguchi K. Homophily and social distance in the choice of multiple friends: An analysis based on conditionally symmetric log-bilinear association model. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1990) 85(410):356–366Google Scholar
• Zeng Z., Xie Y. A preference-opportunity-choice framework with applications to intergroup friendship. Amer. J. Sociol. (2008) 114(3):615–648Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zenger T. R., Lawrence B. S. Organizational demography: The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Acad. Management J. (1989) 32(2):353–376Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ziebro M., Northcraft G., Mannix E. A., Goncalo J. A., Neale M. A. Connecting the dots: Network development, information flow, and creativity in groups. Creativity in Groups: Research on Managing Groups and Teams (2009) 12(JAI Press, Stamford, CT) 135–162Crossref, Google Scholar