Theories of Communication Networks

Abstract

To date, most network research contains one or more of five major problems. First, it tends to be atheoretical, ignoring the various social theories that contain network implications. Second, it explores single levels of analysis rather than the multiple levels out of which most networks are comprised. Third, network analysis has employed very little the insights from contemporary complex systems analysis and computer simulations. Foruth, it typically uses descriptive rather than inferential statistics, thus robbing it of the ability to make claims about the larger universe of networks. Finally, almost all the research is static and cross-sectional rather than dynamic. Theories of Communication Networks presents solutions to all five problems. The authors develop a multitheoretical model that relates different social science theories with different network properties. This model is multilevel, providing a network decomposition that applies the various social theories to all network levels: individuals, dyads, triples, groups, and the entire network. The book then establishes a model from the perspective of complex adaptive systems and demonstrates how to use Blanche, an agent-based network computer simulation environment, to generate and test network theories and hypotheses. It presents recent developments in network statistical analysis, the p* family, which provides a basis for valid multilevel statistical inferences regarding networks. Finally, it shows how to relate communication networks to other networks, thus providing the basis in conjunction with computer simulations to study the emergence of dynamic organizational networks.

One Step, Two Step, Network Step? Complementary Perspectives on Communication Flows in Twittered Citizen Protests

“…This digital footprint provides vast amounts of empirical evidence that can be analyzed. A natural choice of method to analyze the digital footprint of social media seems to be social network analysis (in the sense of Barnett, 2011; Easley & Kleinberg, 2010; Hanneman & Riddle, 2015; Monge & Contractor, 2003). This is because “opinion leadership is not a trait which some people have and others do not, but rather … an integral part of the give-and-take of … potential networks of communication” (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955, p. 33).…”

Communication in Transactive Memory Systems: A Review and Multidimensional Network Perspective

“…A social network consists of a set of actors (nodes) connected by their relations (ties or edges) (Wasserman & Faust, 1994). From the network perspective, a TMS is a group-level network with individual memories as nodes and the TMS/communication processes as ties (Monge & Contractor, 2003). Multidimensional networks, as opposed to unidimensional networks with a single type of nodes and ties, consist of multiple categories of nodes (e.g., people, computers) as well as the various relations among them (e.g., friendship, task communication; Contractor et al, 2011; Monge & Contractor, 2003).…”

Performance Appraisal Politics in the Public Sector: The Effects of Political Skill and Social Similarity on Performance Rating

“…Fourth, “networking ability” refers to “an individual’s ability to build connections with others.” The core intuition of social capital theory based on structuralist tradition is that social ties and interpersonal connections strengthen mutual reciprocity and affinity as they facilitate sympathy and trust (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Burt, 1997). “Networking ability” has thus been generally regarded as a substantial competency that endows an individual with strategic advantages in terms of benefit exchange (Monge & Contractor, 2003, for a comprehensive review). Extending the idea into the appraisal context, one might assume that an appraisee who has more networking ability, especially directed toward supervisors, will likely have a strategic advantage with regard to performance ratings.…”