Preferences, Identity, and Competition: Predicting Tie Strength from Demographic Data

Abstract

This research examines the combined influence of three causal mechanisms shaping interpersonal dynamics. Sharing a demographic characteristic has been shown to strengthen a relationship between people. The initial explanation for this positive effect emphasized the importance of individual preferences for social contact. Similar people share common interests, which makes them more attractive as exchange partners. More recent explanations have highlighted the important role of identification and competition. Identification increases the tendency for strong ties to develop among similar people, while competition reduces that tendency. I argue that tie strength is a function of all three mechanisms: a baseline level of interpersonal attraction, a positive identification effect, and a negative competition adjustment. Identification and competition vary with the number of people sharing the focal attribute to define a predictable association between sharing the focal attribute and the strength of a network connection. Predictions are tested with tenure and tie-strength data from a small research and development firm. Analysis indicates that having the same tenure has the predicted effect on communication frequency. The implications of the findings are discussed for homophily research in particular and demography research in general.homophily, organizational demography, identity, competition, diversity

How do Entrepreneurial Bosses Influence their Employees’ Future Entrepreneurship Choices?

“…Similar results and explanations have been provided by other studies, either looking at promotion rates or gender wage gaps inside organizations (e.g., Cohen and Broschak, 2013;Cohen and Huffman, 2007). The fact that women in top hierarchies are typically an underrepresented minority may strengthen the ties with other women in the firm, and therefore explain why men and women may be differently affected by same-gender bosses (McGinn and Milkman, 2013; see also Reagans (2005) for a context where men represent the minority).…”

“…Furthermore, specific (entrepreneurial) bosses might be more influential for specific employees. Scholars consistently show that social interactions are partially driven by homophily, meaning that people associate most often and most strongly with others who are similar to themselves, also in organizational settings (McPherson et al, 2001;Reagans, 2005;. Resemblance between individuals is demonstrated to increase communication (Kleinbaum et al, 2011;Reagans, 2011) and consideration for the knowledge transmitted by others (Golub and Jackson, 2012;Kane, 2010).…”

Which Problems to Solve? Online Knowledge Sharing and Attention Allocation in Organizations

“…A personal connection between a provider and a seeker may arise from social similarity or homophily, which encourages interaction between individuals with similar demographic or social characteristics (e.g. McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Cook, 2001;Reagans, 2005).…”

One of Us or One of My Friends: How Social Identity and Tie Strength Shape the Creative Generativity of Boundary-Spanning Ties

“…Indeed, employees are often required to interact frequently with members of other work teams to coordinate efforts. Such interactions may uncover commonalities that lead to homophily, i.e., similarity-attraction (Homans, 1950;McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Cook, 2001;Reagans, 2005). Such perceptions of similarity have been found to underlie interpersonal liking and to distinguish it from social or group-based liking (Hogg & Hains, 1996) 1 .…”