Skip to main content
Log in

Diversity and Popularity in Organizations and Communities

  • Published:
Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines social groupings whose structure depends only on the distribution of ability to attract attention. When people‘s attention is a scarce resource, those individuals who are rated highest by a large number of other individuals will have to ration their attention, resulting in constraints on the social structure of the group. The incidence of popular individuals by that definition reflects the extent to which individuals agree on who their highest-rated colleague is. We propose three basic distributions or ways to generate the matrix of perceived ability so as to yield popularity profiles that can be parametrically adjusted to match observations. We demonstrate that each of these assumption sets leads to a slightly different correlation between the value of the assumption‘s parameter and the set of observable popularity patterns. Since popularity, in real life, often determines such things as power, centrality, over-utilization and perhaps reduced accessibility, having more realistic ways of representing it is important for modeling and understanding virtual organizations and communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banks, D. L., and K. M. Carley. 1996. Models for network evolution. Journal of Mathematical Sociology21(1-2):173-196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, D. J., and M. E. Burkhardt. 1992. Centrality and power in organizations. In N. Nohria and R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. M. 1990. Group stability: A socio-cognitive approach. Advances in Group Processes7:1-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. M. 1991. A theory of group stability. American Sociological Review56:331-354.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. 1992. Nadel’s paradox revisited: Relational and cultural aspects of organizational structure. In N. Nohria and R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feller, W. 1968. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications. Chichester, New York: John Wiley and sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. C. 1997. Uncovering organizational hierarchies. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory3(1).

  • Huberman, B. A., and T. Hogg. 1995. Communities of practice. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory1(1).

  • Kaufer, D. S., and K. M. Carley. 1993. Communication at a Distance: the Influence of Print on Sociocutural Organization and Change. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. 1991. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London: Sage Pubications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nasrallah, W., Glynn, P. & Levitt, R. Diversity and Popularity in Organizations and Communities. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 4, 347–372 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009686430066

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009686430066

Navigation