You have free access to this content

Homophily of Network Ties and Bonding and Bridging Social Capital in Computer-Mediated Distributed Teams

  1. Y. Connie Yuan†,
  2. Geri Gay‡

Article first published online: 9 OCT 2006

DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00308.x

Issue

Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

Volume 11, Issue 4, pages 1062–1084, July 2006

Additional Information

How to Cite

Yuan, Y. C. and Gay, G. (2006), Homophily of Network Ties and Bonding and Bridging Social Capital in Computer-Mediated Distributed Teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11: 1062–1084. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00308.x

Author Information

  1. Departments of Communication and Information Science Cornell University

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 9 OCT 2006
  2. Article first published online: 9 OCT 2006

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (132K)

References

  • Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.
  • Argote, L. (1999). Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
  • Argote, L., & Ophir, R. (2002). Intraorganizational learning. In J. A. C.Baum, (Ed.), Companion to Organizations (pp. 181–207). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Armstrong, D. J., & Cole, P. (2002). Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. In P. J.Hinds & S.Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed Work (pp. 167–186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Arrow, H., McGrath, J. E., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). Small Groups as Complex Systems: Formation, Coordination, Development and Adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (2004a). Introduction: Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. In S. A.Barab, R.Kling, & J. H.Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp. 3–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (Eds.). (2004b). Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J. G., & Scheckler, R. (2004). Designing system dualities: Characterizing an online professional development community. In S. A.Barab, R.Kling, & J. H.Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp. 53–90). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Baum, J. A. C. (1999). Whole-part coevolutionary competition in organization. In J. A. C.Baum, B.McKelvey (Ed.), Variations in Organization Science (pp. 113–136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET 6.0. Natick: Analytic Technologies.
  • Bradner, E., & Mark, G. (2002, November). Why Distance Matters: Effects on Cooperation, Persuasion and Deception. Paper presented at the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ’02), New Orleans, LA.
  • Burt, R. S. (1997). A note on social capital and network content. Social Networks, 19(4), 355–373.
  • Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In N.Lin, K.Cook, & R.Burt (Eds.), Social Capital: Theory and Research (pp. 31–56). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
  • Byrne, D. E. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
  • Connaughton, S. L., & Daly, J. A. (2004). Long distance leadership: Communicative strategies for leading virtual teams. In D. J.Pauleen (Ed.), Virtual Teams: Projects, Protocols, and Processes (pp. 116–144). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. K. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural determinants. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571.
  • Feld, S. (1981). The focused organization of organizational ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86(5), 1015–1035.
  • Feld, S. (1982). Structural determinants of similarity among associates. American Sociological Review, 47(6), 797–801.
  • Fulk, J. (1993). Social construction of communication technology. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 921–950.
  • Geletkanycz, M., & Hambrick, D. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 654–681.
  • Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community Organizing: Building Social Capital as a Development Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.
  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2001). Exploring multiplexity: Social network structures in a computer-supported distance learning class. The Information Society, 17(3), 211–226.
  • Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1998). Work, friendship and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of American Society for Information Science, 46(12), 1101–1104.
    Direct Link:
  • Hinds, P. J., & Bailey, D. E. (2003). Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organization Science, 14(6), 615–632.
  • Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422–447.
  • Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 673–703.
  • Ibarra, H., & Andrews, S. B. (1993). Power, social influence, and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(2), 277–303.
  • Kauffman, S. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Kavanaugh, A. L., Reese, D. D., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2005). Weak ties in networked communities. The Information Society, 21(2), 119–131.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In N.Nohria & R.Eccles (Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action (pp. 216–239). Boston: Harvard Business School Express.
  • Lave, J. (1997). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding. In D.Kirshner & J. A.Whitson (Eds.), Situated Cognition (pp. 17–35). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Leenders, R. T. A. J. (1996). Evolution of friendship and best friendship choices. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 21(1–2), 133–148.
  • Leonard, M. (2004). Bonding and bridging social capital: Reflections from Belfast. Sociology: The Journal of the British Sociological Association, 38(5), 927–944.
  • Lewis, K. (2000, August). Is performance all in their mind(s)? The impact of transactive memory on knowledge worker team performance. Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Toronto, Canada.
  • Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks in America. American Sociological Review, 52(1), 122–113.
  • Marsden, P. V. (1990). Network diversity, substructure and opportunity for contact. In C.Calhoun, M. W.Meyer, & W. R.Scott (Eds.), Structures of Power and Constraint: Papers in Honor of Peter Blau (pp. 397–410). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • McKelvey, B. (1999). Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organization Science, 10(3), 294–321.
  • McPherson, M., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1987). Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. American Sociological Review, 52(3), 370.
  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
  • Mollica, K. A., Gray, B., & Trevino, L. K. (2003). Racial homophily and its persistence in newcomers’ social networks. Organization Science, 14(2), 123–136.
  • Monge, P. R., & Contractor, N. (2003). Theories of Communication Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Monge, P. R., Rothman, L. W., Eisenberg, E. M., Miller, K. I., & Kirste, K. K. (1985). The dynamics of organizational proximity. Management Science, 31(9), 1139–1141.
  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673–693.
  • Polanyi, M. (1967). The Tacit Dimension. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon Schuster.
  • Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 21(10), 3–43.
  • Wellman, B. (1988). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In B.Wellman & S. D.Berkowitz (Eds.), Social Structures: A Network Approach (pp. 19–61). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Yuan, Y. C., Gay, G., & Hembrooke, H. (2006). Focused activities and the development of social capital in a distributed learning “community.” The Information Society, 22(1), 25–29.
  • Yuan, Y. C., & McKelvey, B. (2004). Situated learning theory: Adding rate and complexity effects via Kauffman’s NK model. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 8(1), 65–101.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (132K)