Solidarity in collaboration networks when everyone competes for the strongest partner: a stochastic actor-based simulation model

References

• Andersen, K. V. (2013). The problem of embeddedness revisited: Collaboration and market types. Research Policy, 42(1), 139–148. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anjos, F., & Reagans, R. (2013). Commitment, learning, and alliance performance: A formal analysis using an agent-based network formation model. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 37(1), 1–23. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2012.724600
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldwin, T. T., Bedell, M. D., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). The social fabric of a team-based MBA program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40(6), 1369–1397. doi:10.5465/257037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrera, D. (2007). The impact of negotiated exchange on trust and trustworthiness. Social Networks, 29(4), 508–526. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2007.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, F., Casnici, N., & Squazzoni, F. (2018). Solidarity as a byproduct of professional collaboration. Social support and trust in a coworking space. Social Networks, 54, 61–72. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2017.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianchi, F., & Squazzoni, F. (2015). Agent-based models in sociology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 7, 284–306. doi:10.1002/wics.1356
   Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1974). Presidential address: Parameters of social structure. American Sociological Review, 39(5), 615–635. doi:10.2307/2094309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity. New York, NY: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boero, R., & Squazzoni, F. (2005). Does empirical embeddedness matter? Methodological issues on agent-based models for analytical social science. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 8(4), 6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bojanowski, M., & Buskens, V. (2011). Coordination in dynamic social networks under heterogeneity. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 35(4), 249–286. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2010.509523
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourgeois, M., & Friedkin, N. E. (2001). The distant core: Social solidarity, social distance and interpersonal ties in core-periphery structures. Social Networks, 23(4), 245–260. doi:10.1016/S0378-8733(01)00033-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brass, D. J. (1981). Structural relationships, job characteristics, and worker satisfaction and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(3), 331–348. doi:10.2307/2392511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bravo, G., Squazzoni, F., & Boero, R. (2012). Trust and partner selection in social networks: An experimentally grounded model. Social Networks, 34(4), 481–492. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2012.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casciaro, T., & Lobo, M. S. (2008). When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(4), 655–684. doi:10.2189/asqu.53.4.655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 43(5), 721–739. doi:10.2307/2094546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, K. S., Emerson, R. M., Gillmore, M. R., & Yamagishi, T. (1983). The distribution of power in exchange networks: Theory and experimental results. American Journal of Sociology, 89(2), 275–305. doi:10.1086/227866
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, part II: Exchange relations and networks. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 2, pp. 58–87). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Fararo, T. J., & Doreian, P. (1998). The theory of solidarity: An agenda of problems. In P. Doreian & T. J. Fararo (Eds.), The problem of solidarity: Theories and models (pp. 1–31). Amsterdam,NL: Gordon and Breach.
   Google Scholar
• Ferligoj, A., Kronegger, L., Mali, F., Snijders, T. A. B., & Doreian, P. (2015). Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system. Scientometrics, 104(3), 985–1012. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1585-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flache, A., & Hegselmann, R. (1999a). Altruism vs. self-interest in social support. Computer simulations of social support networks in cellular worlds. Advances in Group Processes, 16, 61–97.
   Google Scholar
• Flache, A., & Hegselmann, R. (1999b). Rationality vs. learning in the evolution of solidarity networks: A theoretical comparison. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 5(2), 97–127. doi:10.1023/A:1009662602975
   Google Scholar
• Flache, A., Mäs, M., Feliciani, T., Chattoe-Brown, E., Deffuant, G., Huet, S., & Lorenz, J. (2017). Models of social influence: Towards the next frontiers. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 20(4), 2. doi:10.18564/jasss.3521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flache, A., & Stark, T. (2009). Preference or opportunity? Why do we find more friendship segregation in more heterogeneous schools? arXiv preprint arXiv:0901.2825.
   Google Scholar
• Frank, O., & Strauss, D. (1986). Markov graphs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81(395), 832–842. doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M. (2017). Society and economy. Framework and principles. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grow, A., Flache, A., & Wittek, R. (2015). An agent-based model of status construction in task focused groups. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18(2), 4. doi:10.18564/jasss.2740
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hechter, M. (1987). Principles of group solidarity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Homans, G. C. (1950). The human group. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.
   Google Scholar
• Komter, A. E. (2001). The disguised rationality of solidarity: Gift giving in informal relations. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 25(4), 385–401. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2001.9990261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuwabara, K. (2011). Cohesion, cooperation, and the value of doing things together: How economic exchange creates relational bonds. American Sociological Review, 76(4), 560–580. doi:10.1177/0003122411414825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawler, E. J. (2001). An affect theory of social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 107(2), 321–352. doi:10.1086/324071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawler, E. J., Thye, S. R., & Yoon, J. (2008). Social exchange and micro social order. American Sociological Review, 73(4), 519–542. doi:10.1177/000312240807300401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindenberg, S. (1998). Solidarity: Its microfoundations and macrodependence. A framing approach. In P. Doreian & T. Fararo (Eds.), The problem of solidarity. Theories and models (pp. 61–112). Amsterdam,NL: Gordon and Breach.
   Google Scholar
• Lindenberg, S., Fetchenhauer, D., Flache, A., & Buunk, A. P. (2006). Solidarity and prosocial behavior. A framing approach. In D. Fetchenhauer, A. Flache, A. P. Buunk, & S. Lindenberg (Eds.), Solidarity and prosocial behavior. An integration of sociological and psychological perspectives (pp. 3–19). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lusher, D., Robins, G., Pattison, P. E., & Lomi, A. (2012). Trust me: Differences in expressed and perceived trust relations in an organization. Social Networks, 34(4), 410–424. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2012.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macy, M., & Flache, A. (2009). Social dynamics from the bottom up: Agent-based models of social interaction. In P. Hedström & P. Bearman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of analytical sociology (pp. 245–268). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mizruchi, M. S. (2004). Berle and Means revisited: The governance and power of large U.S. corporations. Theory and Society, 33(5), 579–617. doi:10.1023/B:RYSO.0000045757.93910.ed
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D. (1994). Dependence and risk: Transforming the structure of social exchange. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(3), 163–176. doi:10.2307/2786874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D. (2003). Theoretical comparisons of forms of exchange. Sociological Theory, 21(1), 1–17. doi:10.1111/1467-9558.00171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D. (2010). The structure of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(2), 119–131. doi:10.1177/0190272510369079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D., Collett, J. L., & Schaefer, D. R. (2007). Building solidarity through generalized exchange: A theory of reciprocity. American Journal of Sociology, 113(1), 205–242. doi:10.1086/517900
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D., Schaefer, D. R., & Collett, J. L. (2009). Fragile and resilient trust: Risk and uncertainty in negotiated and reciprocal exchange. Sociological Theory, 27(1), 1–32. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2009.00336.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molm, L. D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of Sociology, 105(5), 1396–1427. doi:10.1086/210434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moody, J. (2001). Race, school integration, and friendship segregation in America. American Journal of Sociology, 107(3), 679–716. doi:10.1086/338954
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213–238. doi:10.1177/000312240406900204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mora-Cantallops, M., & Sicilia, M.-Á. (2019). Team efficiency and network structure: The case of professional league of legends. Social Networks, 58, 105–115. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2019.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98(2), 404–409. doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton, T., & Willer, D. (1990). Connection and power in centralized exchange networks. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 16(1), 31–49. doi:10.1080/0022250X.1990.9990077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raub, W., Buskens, V., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (2011). Micro-macro links and microfoundations in sociology. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 35(1–3), 1–25. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2010.532263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robins, G., Pattison, P., & Wang, P. (2009). Closure, connectivity and degree distributions: Exponential random graph (p) models for directed social networks. Social Networks, 31(2), 105–117. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2008.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubineau, B., Lim, Y., & Neblo, M. (2019). Low status rejection: How status hierarchies influence negative tie formation. Social Networks, 56, 33–44. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2018.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaefer, D. R. (2007). Votes, favors, toys, and ideas: The effect of resource characteristics on power in exchange networks. Sociological Focus, 40(2), 138–160. doi:10.1080/00380237.2007.10571303
   Google Scholar
• Snijders, T. A. B. (1996). Stochastic actor-oriented models for network change. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 21(1–2), 149–172. doi:10.1080/0022250X.1996.9990178
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snijders, T. A. B. (2017). Stochastic actor-oriented models for network dynamics. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 4, 343–363. doi:10.1146/annurev-statistics-060116-054035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snijders, T. A. B., Lomi, A., & Torló, V. J. (2013). A model for the multiplex dynamics of two-mode and one-mode networks, with an application to employment preference, friendship, and advice. Social Networks, 35(2), 265–276. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2012.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snijders, T. A. B., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2015). Representing micro-macro linkages by actor-based dynamic network models. Sociological Methods and Research, 44(2), 222–271. doi:10.1177/0049124113494573
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316–325. doi:10.5465/3069458
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stadtfeld, C. (2018). The micro-macro link in social networks. In R. A. Scott, S. M. Kosslyn, & M. Buchmann (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences. Chichester: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0463
   Google Scholar
• Stadtfeld, C., Takács, K., & Vörös, A. (2020). The emergence and stability of groups in social networks. Social Networks, 60,129–145. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2019.10.008
   Google Scholar
• Takács, K., Bravo, G., & Squazzoni, F. (2018). Referrals and information flow in networks increase discrimination: A laboratory experiment. Social Networks, 54, 254–265. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2018.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thye, S. R., Yoon, J., & Lawler, E. J. (2002). The theory of relational cohesion: Review of a research program. Advances in Group Processes, 19, 139–166. doi:10.1016/S0882-6145(02)19006-0
   Google Scholar
• Uzzi, B., & Spiro, J. (2005). Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), 447–504. doi:10.1086/432782
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westphal, J. D., & Milton, L. P. (2000). How experience and network ties affect the influence of demographic minorities on corporate boards. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2), 366–398. doi:10.2307/2667075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiong, H., Payne, D., & Kinsella, S. (2018). Identifying mechanisms underlying peer effects on multiplex networks. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 21(4), 6. doi:10.18564/jasss.3797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamaguchi, K. (1996). Power in networks of substitutable and complementary exchange relations: A rational-choice model and an analysis of power centralization. American Sociological Review, 61(2), 308–332. doi:10.2307/2096336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar