a b s t r a c tThe novelty of scientific or technological knowledge has a paradoxical dual implication. Highly novel ideas are subject to a higher risk of rejection by their evaluating audiences than incremental, "normal science" contributions. Yet the same audiences may deem a contribution to knowledge valuable because it is highly novel. This study develops and tests an explanation of this dual effect. It is argued that the recognition premium that highly acclaimed authors' work enjoys disproportionately accrues to work that is consistent with the authors' previously developed identity. Because high novelty is a salient identity marker, authors' past recognition for highly novel work helps same authors' new highly novel work earn positive audience valuation. It is further argued that, because recognition for novelty is partly inherited from mentors, disciples of highly acclaimed producers of novel work are more likely to have their work prized for its novelty. In contrast, the authors' or their mentors' recognition earned for relatively less novel work does not trigger similar spillover effects and leaves the authors vulnerable to the novelty discount. Unique data on the productivity, career histories, and mentoring relations of academic electrical engineers support these arguments.

How does a history of competition between two economic actors affect their willingness and ability to work together for mutual benefi t? Existing theory and research offer mixed predictions and answers. The competitive embeddedness hypothesis suggested here postulates that the likelihood of cooperation between two fi rms is positively related to the intensity of competition between these fi rms in the preceding period. The likely mechanisms leading to this are familiarity and knowledge-based trust, both of which are greater between competitors than between noncompetitors or two randomly selected actors. Analysis of investment syndicates in venture capital industry supports the competitive embeddedness hypothesis. The hypothesis holds independently of business culture and of the industry's development stage.

Millions of U.S. adults join online support groups to attain health goals, but the social ties they form are often too weak to provide the support they need. What impedes the strengthening of ties in such groups? We explore the role of demographic differences in causing the impediment and demographic self-disclosure in removing it. Using a field study of online quit-smoking groups complemented by three laboratory experiments, we find that members tend to hide demographic differences, concerned about poor social integration that will weaken their ties. However, the self-disclosures of demographic differences that naturally occur during group member discussions actually strengthen their ties, which in turn facilitates attainment of members' health goals. In other words, social ties in online groups are weak not because members are demographically different, but because they are reluctant to self-disclose their differences. If they do self-disclose, this breeds interpersonal connection, trumping any demographic differences among them. Data from both laboratory and field about two types of demographic difference-dyad-level dissimilarity and group-level minority statusprovide convergent support for our findings.

Millions of U.S. adults join online support groups to attain health goals, but the social ties they form are often too weak to provide the support they need. What impedes the strengthening of ties in such groups? We explore the role of demographic differences in causing the impediment and demographic self-disclosure in removing it. Using a field study of online quit-smoking groups complemented by three laboratory experiments, we find that members tend to hide demographic differences, concerned about poor social integration that will weaken their ties. However, the self-disclosures of demographic differences that naturally occur during group member discussions actually strengthen their ties, which in turn facilitates attainment of members' health goals. In other words, social ties in online groups are weak not because members are demographically different, but because they are reluctant to self-disclose their differences. If they do self-disclose, this breeds interpersonal connection, trumping any demographic differences among them. Data from both laboratory and field about two types of demographic difference-dyad-level dissimilarity and group-level minority statusprovide convergent support for our findings.

No abstract