Understanding the Ties that Bind: A Longitudinal Investigation of the Evolution of a Communication Network

Abstract

Current understanding of the emergence of communication networks is hindered by at least two limitations: (a) studies tend to incorporate only 1 theoretical mechanism, and (b) studies tend to be cross-sectional. We address these concerns by analyzing the influence of 11 factors on the evolution of a communication network over 2 years. Our model is grounded in the multitheory, multilevel framework, and our analysis uses recently developed actor-oriented techniques for statistically modeling network emergence. Results suggest accurate and complete understanding of network evolution depends on studies simultaneously incorporating multiple theories that offer both complementary and contrasting explanations of the phenomenon.

Creative Interaction and Multiplexity in Intraorganizational Networks

“…Based on existing literature, a number of endogenous and exogenous influences for uniplex networks were included as control variables (Table 1). Endogenous effects refer to the internal structural rules that influence certain network structures to form in the focal network (Contractor, Whitbred, Fonti, & Steglich, 2012; Monge & Contractor, 2003; Whitbred, Fonti, Steglich, & Contractor, 2011). First, edge parameter was included to control for the baseline propensity to form ties, in other words, the density of network.…”

The “Real World”? Effects of Online Communication about Prostate Cancer on Offline Communication

“…These resources may include data, information, goods and services, social support, and financial support [ 30 ]. Recent research findings support this, suggesting that there can be numerous types of actors and interactions within an online social network [ 31 , 32 ]. Practically, however, personal network relationships can help members access social cues, provide people with a sense of belonging, form their identity, and gain a sense of protection from being around others like them [ 28 , 33 ].…”

Communication networks of men facing a diagnosis of prostate cancer

“…However, Contractor et al . () regard network theory not as one but many theoretical mechanisms, arguing for a multi‐theoretical, multilevel (MTML) analytical framework. Contractor et al .…”

“…Contractor et al . () identified 11 theories which contributed to the concept and development of communication networks enabling various levels of analysis, focussing, for example, on individuals, dyads and larger networks. The MTML framework is grounded in organisational communication, but two of the 11 theories, homophily and physical/geographical proximity theory, are most relevant in the context of this health research focusing on how individuals use communication networks.…”

“…Aspects of both network theory (Contractor et al . ) and the DD‐MM (Greene ) are used as a framework for analysing the interpretive findings of this study. They encompass the nature of networks and the individual's response to engaging those networks through the process of disclosure.…”