The microstructures of network recall: How social networks are encoded and represented in human memory

Brashears, Matthew E.; Quintane, Eric

doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.11.003

Cited by 126 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 110 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cognitive network research shows that, in general, people struggle to learn and recall who is connected to whom in the workplace (Brands, 2013;Kilduff & Brass, 2010). To compensate, people "chunk" the network into triads as a fundamental way of learning and recalling who is connected to whom (Brashears & Quintane, 2015;De Soto, 1960;Janicik & Larrick, 2005).…”

Section: How Does Personal Sense Of Power Affect Brokerage Opportunitmentioning

confidence: 99%

The paradox of agency: Feeling powerful reduces brokerage opportunity recognition yet increases willingness to broker.

Landis¹,

Kilduff²,

Menges³

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests positions of brokerage in organizational networks provide many benefits, but studies tend to assume everyone is equally able to perceive and willing to act on brokerage opportunities. Here we challenge these assumptions in a direct investigation of whether people can perceive brokerage opportunities and are willing to broker. We propose that the psychological experience of power diminishes individuals' ability to perceive opportunities to broker between people who are not directly connected in their networks, yet enhances their willingness to broker. In Study 1, we find that employees in a marketing and media agency who had a high sense of power were likely to see fewer brokerage opportunities in their advice networks. In Study 2, we provide causal evidence for this claim in an experiment where the psychological experience of power is manipulated. Those who felt powerful, relative to those who felt little power, tended to see fewer brokerage opportunities than actually existed, yet were more willing to broker, irrespective of whether there was a brokerage opportunity present. Collectively, these findings present a paradox of agency: Individuals who experience power are likely to underperceive the very brokerage opportunities for which their sense of agency is suited. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract

Section: How Does Personal Sense Of Power Affect Brokerage Opportunitmentioning

confidence: 99%

The paradox of agency: Feeling powerful reduces brokerage opportunity recognition yet increases willingness to broker.

Landis¹,

Kilduff²,

Menges³

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, if people are not required to recall groups themselves, but they are asked to judge groups that are presented to them (e.g., in form of a list of names or a social network illustration), they automatically receive information on the size of the group. Thus, group size is arguably a readily available structural feature in people's memory and perception of groups (Brashears & Quintane, 2015). Building on the notion that individuals use heuristics to store and recall social network information (Brashears, 2013), we suggest that group size qualifies as such a heuristic to infer group cohesion.…”

Section: Social Network Structure Vs Individual Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Perceived group cohesion versus actual social structure: A study using social network analysis of egocentric Facebook networks

Tulin¹,

Pollet

Lehmann‐Willenbrock

2018

Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on group cohesion often relies on individual perceptions, which may not reflect the actual social structure of groups. This study draws on social network theory to examine the relationship between observable structural group characteristics and individual perceptions of group cohesion. Leveraging Facebook data, we extracted and partitioned the social networks of 109 participants into groups using a modularity algorithm. We then surveyed perceptions of cohesion, and computed group density and size using social network analysis. Out of six linear mixed effects models specified, a random intercept and fixed slope model with group size as a predictor of perceived group cohesion emerged as best fitting. Whereas group density was not linked to perceived cohesion, size had a small negative effect on perceived cohesion, suggesting that people perceive smaller groups as more cohesive. We discuss the potential of social network analysis, visualization tools, and Facebook data for advancing research on groups.

show abstract

“…The thinking aloud revealed that grouping alters can be due to fatigue, especially when large groups and big networks are involved. Besides, grouping can be a way of clustering alters cognitively, something we coined "natural groups" (similarly, Brashears & Quintane, 2015). However, it was especially with free designs that groups were named.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collecting egocentric network data with visual tools: A comparative study

Hollstein

Töpfer

2020

Net Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When collecting egocentric network data, visual representations of networks can function as a cognitive aid for depicting relationships, helping to maintain an overview of the relationships, and keeping the attention of the interviewees. Additionally, network maps can serve as a narration generator in qualitative and in mixed-methods studies. While varying visual instruments are used for collecting egocentric network data, little is known about differences among visual tools concerning the influence on the resulting network data, the usability for interviewees, and data validity. The article provides an overview of existing visually oriented tools that are used to collect egocentric networks and discusses their functions, advantages, and limitations. Then, we present results of an experimental study where we compare four different visual tools with regard to networks elicited, manageability, and the impact of follow-up questions. In order to assess the manageability of the four tools, we used the thinking aloud method. The results provide evidence that the decision in favor of a specific visual tool (structured vs. unstructured) can affect the size and composition of the elicited networks. Follow-up questions greatly affect the elicited networks and follow-up cues can level out differences among tools. Respondents tend to prefer the concentric circles tool, with some differences in preferences and manageability of tools between participants with low and those with high socioeconomic status. Finally, assets and drawbacks of the four instruments are discussed with regard to data quality and crucial aspects of the data collection process when using visual tools.

show abstract

The microstructures of network recall: How social networks are encoded and represented in human memory

Cited by 126 publications

References 110 publications

The paradox of agency: Feeling powerful reduces brokerage opportunity recognition yet increases willingness to broker.

The paradox of agency: Feeling powerful reduces brokerage opportunity recognition yet increases willingness to broker.

Perceived group cohesion versus actual social structure: A study using social network analysis of egocentric Facebook networks

Collecting egocentric network data with visual tools: A comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About