Uneingeschränkter Zugang

Do Birds of a Feather Always Flock Together? Deep-Level Diversity as an Organizing Social Principle for Task-Relevant Relationships

 und   
18. Feb. 2024

Zitieren
COVER HERUNTERLADEN

Figure 1:

Sociogram depicting hindrance relationships, with node shade indicating political preference. (n = number of individuals = 417; black = democratic; gray = republican; white = other/no response).
Sociogram depicting hindrance relationships, with node shade indicating political preference. (n = number of individuals = 417; black = democratic; gray = republican; white = other/no response).

Figure 2:

Sociogram depicting TMS relationships, with node shade indicating sexual orientation. (n = number of individuals = 417; black = heterosexual; gray = nonheterosexual). TMS, transactive memory system.
Sociogram depicting TMS relationships, with node shade indicating sexual orientation. (n = number of individuals = 417; black = heterosexual; gray = nonheterosexual). TMS, transactive memory system.

ERGM revealing the impact of deep-level homophily on social tie formation_

Parameter Liking (AIC = 532.00; BIC = 598.10) Trust (AIC = 915.70; BIC = 981.90)
Effect estimate SE Odds ratio Effect estimate SE Odds ratio
Covariates
edges 2.45* 0.71 1.60* 0.48
nodeifactor
Nonheterosexual −0.64 0.50 0.53 −0.07 0.37 0.93
Republican 0.31 0.47 1.36 −0.29 0.28 0.75
Other political preference −0.14 0.38 0.87 −0.24 0.26 0.79
Female −0.10 0.39 0.90 −0.09 0.26 0.91
Other gender 1.08 0.86 2.94 0.39 0.61 1.48
nodeofactor
Nonheterosexual 0.76 0.60 2.14 0.28 0.38 1.32
Republican 0.28 0.45 1.32 0.19 0.30 1.21
Other political preference 0.13 0.39 1.14 −0.05 0.26 0.95
Female −0.29 0.40 0.75 −0.19 0.26 0.83
Other gender −1.47 0.84 0.23 −0.38 0.60 0.68
nodematch
Gender 0.07 0.39 1.07 0.08 0.25 1.08
Deep-level homophily (nodematch)
Sexual orientation −0.06 0.48 0.94 −0.14 0.35 0.87
Political preference 0.24 0.36 1.27 −0.12 0.23 0.89

Binary logistic regression predicting performance for lowest- and highest-performing teams (t = 113)_

Parameter Beta SE Odds ratio
Gender diversity (covariate) −1.34 1.21 0.26
Sexual orientation diversity −0.08 1.22 0.92
Political preference diversity 2.25* 1.23 9.52

ERGM revealing the impact of deep-level homophily on task-relevant tie formation_

Parameter TMS (AIC = −233,251.00; BIC = −233,185.00) Hindrance (AIC = −237,997.00; BIC = −237,931.00)
Effect estimate SE Odds ratio Effect estimate SE Odds ratio
Covariates
edges −5.98*** 0.27 −10.05*** 0.85
nodeifactor
Nonheterosexual 0.06 0.21 1.06 0.72 0.47 2.05
Republican 0.16 0.18 1.17 0.12 0.44 1.13
Other political preference 0.18 0.15 1.20 0.17 0.36 1.19
Female −0.02 0.15 0.98 0.66 0.54 1.93
Other gender −0.43 0.34 0.65 −0.44 0.98 0.64
nodeofactor
Nonheterosexual −0.44 0.22 0.64 −0.52 0.55 0.59
Republican −0.33 0.18 0.72 −0.55 0.54 0.58
Other political preference 0.09 0.15 1.09 0.55 0.34 1.73
Female 0.02 0.15 1.02 1.14* 0.56 3.13
Other gender 0.45 0.35 1.57 1.86* 0.85 6.42
nodematch
Gender 0.41** 0.14 1.51 −0.28 0.52 0.76
Deep-level homophily (nodematch)
Sexual orientation −0.41* 0.20 0.66 0.55 0.45 1.73
Political preference 0.12 0.14 1.13 0.69* 0.31 1.99
Sprache:
Englisch
Zeitrahmen der Veröffentlichung:
1 Hefte pro Jahr
Fachgebiete der Zeitschrift:
Sozialwissenschaften, Sozialwissenschaften, andere