This review highlights one stream of work within the social network field, namely the work on cognitive social structures (CSS). First, CSS research is positioned within the field of social networks, and the key methods associated with CSS research are described. Research examining systematic biases in individuals' perceptions of social networks is covered, as is research examining the consequences of biased network perceptions (in terms of behaviors and outcomes). A research agenda is forwarded, suggesting three key directions for future research: the social capital of cognitive ties, extending and challenging network accuracy as a source of advantage and collective agency and organizational change. The overall goal is to invigorate research that moves beyond the description of cognitive social structures to an outcome-focused research paradigm.

D o women face bias in the social realm in which they are purported to excel? Across two different studies (one organizational and one comprising MBA teams), we examined whether the friendship networks around women tend to be systematically misperceived and whether there were effects of these misperceptions on the women themselves and their teammates. Thus, we investigated the possibility (hitherto neglected in the network literature) that biases in friendship networks are triggered not just by the complexity of social relationships but also by the gender of those being perceived. Study 1 showed that, after controlling for actual network positions, men, relative to women, were perceived to occupy agentic brokerage roles in the friendship network-those roles involving less constraint and higher betweenness and outdegree centrality. Study 2 showed that if a team member misperceived a woman to occupy such roles, the woman was seen as competent but not warm. Furthermore, to the extent that gender stereotypes were endorsed by many individuals in the team, women performed worse on their individual tasks. But teams in which members fell back on well-rehearsed perceptions of gender roles (men rather than women misperceived as brokers) performed better than teams in which members tended toward misperceiving women occupying agentic brokerage roles. Taken together, these results contribute to unlocking the mechanisms by which social networks affect women's progress in organizations.

Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LBS Research Online for purposes of research and/or private study. Further distribution of the material, or use for any commercial gain, is not permitted. AbstractThis paper proposes gender differences in responses to recruitment rejections as a previously unexamined mechanism contributing to women's under-representation in top management.We show that women are less likely than men to consider another job with a prospective employer that has rejected them in the past. We build a theoretical model whereby, because of women's minority status in senior roles, recruitment rejection triggers uncertainty about their general belonging in the executive domain. Belonging uncertainty, in turn, both leads women to place greater weight than men on fair treatment and negatively affects their perceptions of the fairness of the treatment they receive. This dual process makes women more disinclined than men to apply again to a previously rejecting firm. We test our theory with three studies: A field study using longitudinal archival data from an executive search firm, a survey of executives, and an experiment using executive respondents. The results, which are consistent with our model, have implications for theory and practice regarding gender inequality at the labor market's upper echelons. In particular, we highlight that women's supply-side decisions to "lean out" of competition for senior roles must be understood in light of their previous experiences with demand-side employers' practices. experiments have found gender differences in the willingness to compete, there is not much research establishing the relevance of these differences for labor market outcomes (Bertrand, 2011;Sutter and Glätzle-Rützler, 2015). Most evidence in this field concerns women's choices of college majors before even starting their careers (Correll, 2001; Buser, et al., 2012), and only a handful of studies examine women's actual job application choices (Barbulescu and Bidwell, 2013; Flory, et al., 2014).Beyond the lack of direct evidence, another problem with extant accounts of women's reluctance to strive for senior roles is that the decisions to compete (or not) for these jobs are usually treated as being independent of women's actual experiences in executive selection systems. There is, after all, substantial evidence that female under-representation in top management is due not only to women's choices but also to employers' practices -that is, to the demand side of the labor market (Reskin and Roos, 1990;Haveman and Beresford, 2012). 4Laboratory studies have pointed to unconscious bias and stereotyping as drivers of employers' preferences for male candidates during screening and evaluation processes (Eagly and Karau, 2002). At the same time, considerable field research establishes that women face promotion barriers within organizations (Cohen, et al., 1998; Barnett, et al., 2000) and are often disadvantaged in external hiring processes (Petersen and Saporta, 2004; FernandezMateo ...

Please scroll down for article-it is on subsequent pagesWith 12,500 members from nearly 90 countries, INFORMS is the largest international association of operations research (O.R.) and analytics professionals and students. INFORMS provides unique networking and learning opportunities for individual professionals, and organizations of all types and sizes, to better understand and use O.R. and analytics tools and methods to transform strategic visions and achieve better outcomes. For more information on INFORMS, its publications, membership, or meetings visit C harisma is crucially important for a range of leadership outcomes. Charisma is also in the eye of the beholder-an attribute perceived by followers. Traditional leadership theory has tended to assume charismatic attributions flow to men rather than women. We challenge this assumption of an inevitable charismatic bias toward men leaders. We propose that gender-biased attributions about the charismatic leadership of men and women are facilitated by the operation of a leader-in-social-network schema. Attributions of charismatic leadership depend on the match between the gender of the leader and the perceived structure of the network. In three studies encompassing both experimental and survey data, we show that when team advice networks are perceived to be centralized around one or a few individuals, women leaders are seen as less charismatic than men leaders. However, when networks are perceived to be cohesive (many connections among individuals), it is men who suffer a charismatic leadership disadvantage relative to women. Perceptions of leadership depend not only on whether the leader is a man or a woman but also on the social network context in which the leader is embedded.

No abstract

Social network analysis, now often thought of simply as network science, has penetrated nearly every scientific and many scholarly fields and has become an indispensable resource. Yet, social networks are special by virtue of being specifically social, and our growing understanding of the brain is affecting our understanding of how social networks form, mature, and are exploited by their members. We discuss the expanding research on how the brain manages social information, how this information is heuristically processed, and how network cognitions are affected by situation and circumstance. In the process, we argue that the cognitive turn in social networks exemplifies the modern conception of the brain as fundamentally reprogrammable by experience and circumstance. Far from social networks being dependent upon the brain, we anticipate a modern view in which cognition and social networks coconstitute each other. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Sociology, Volume 46 is July 30, 2020. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

We review the ways in which gender is theorized in social network research and propose an alternative approach for future research to consider. To assess "what we do," we undertake an evaluative review. In that review, we first examine how gender is typically theorized in structural approaches to social network research. Then, in greater detail, we review social network research that affords more diversity into such theorizing. We organize this more detailed review around a framework that is based on the level of analysis at which the implications of gender are invoked (cognitive, behavioral) and the focus of relational mechanisms that are used (ego-based, alter-based). Following this review of "what we do," we consider "what we can do" by reflecting on the state of the literature and proposing a broad agenda, which we see as an alternative to many of the current approaches. We illustrate the implications of this alternative using four research topics and approaches.

No abstract