Search results

We propose that social projection – assuming a connection between your and others’ attitudes – can promote participation in generalized exchange.

Drawing on the social projection literature, we posit that false consensus (overestimating the similarity between our attitudes and others’) can increase people’s willingness to participate in generalized exchange. In contrast, we expect that pluralistic ignorance (underestimating the similarity between our attitudes and others’) can undermine the same motivation. We propose that false consensus will not only make people more inclined to participate in generalized exchange but also lead to more successful exchanges through an advantageous self-selection process. Finally, we propose that perceived similarity will lead to false consensus, and in turn, increased participation in generalized exchange, whereas perceived dissimilarity will lead to pluralistic ignorance.

We suggest several ways to influence false consensus in order to promote a healthy pattern of generalized exchange.

We put forth a set of novel predictions concerning the relationship between social projection and social exchange. Our theorizing contributes to the existing literature on antecedents of generalized exchange.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate which exchange structure, direct or generalized exchange, better promotes community solidarity in online communities (OCs). Furthermore, it examines the moderating effects of activity intensity on the relationship between exchange structure and community solidarity in order to resolve the conflicts in extant literature.

The research model is developed based on the social exchange theory (SET). It also accommodates social structures as determinants of exchange structure, such as organizational identity orientation (OIO) and distributive justice norms. Data in this study were collected from 376 OCs through an e-mail survey.

Generalized exchange has stronger effects on community solidarity than direct exchange. Furthermore, there was a significant difference in the impact on community solidarity between generalized exchange and direct exchange at high-activity intensity levels, whereas no significant differences were found at low-activity intensity conditions. OIO significantly influences exchange structure. Additionally, equality norm significantly influences generalized exchange, whereas need norm significantly influences direct exchange.

In information systems research, there have not been any attempts to identify the determinants of exchange structure in OCs. Furthermore, only a couple of studies have empirically investigated the relationship between exchange structure and OC solidarity, and yet they found conflicting results. This research makes contributions to an enhancement of theoretical precision of the SET in two ways: by empirically examining the determinants of exchange structure, and by introducing a third variable, activity intensity, as a moderator of the relationship between exchange structure and OC solidarity.

Two models of organizational behavior are reviewed. The apolitical model describes a relatively stable and centralized monolith, while the political model describes a potentially unstable federation of self‐interested parties. It is argued that the apolitical model is largely predicated on social and generalized exchange and forces for stability, while the political model is largely predicated on economic and dyadic exchange and forces for instability. It is further argued that the contradictions inherent in these forces help fuel evolutionary change (where the apolitical model becomes most salient), punctuated by revolutionary change (where the political model becomes most salient). Thus, the two models apply simultaneously to organizational action, suggesting that the organization can be seen as both a stable monolith and an unstable coalition.

This chapter analyzes the ways that individuals develop person-to-group ties. The chapter reviews the development and evidentiary basis of the theory of relational cohesion, the affect theory of social exchange, and the theory of social commitments.

We survey twenty-five years of published literature on these theories, and review unpublished theoretical tests and extensions that are currently in progress.

The research program has grown substantially over the past twenty-five years to encompass more varied and diverse phenomena. The findings indicate that structural interdependencies, repeated exchanges, and a sense of shared responsibility are key conditions for people to develop affective ties to groups, organizations, and even nation-states.

The research implies that if people are engaged in joint tasks, they attribute positive or negative feelings from those tasks to their local groups (teams, departments) and/or to larger organizations (companies, communities). To date, empirical tests have focused on microlevel processes.

Our work has practical implications for how managers or supervisors organize tasks and work routines in a way to maximize group or organizational commitment.

This research helps to understand problems of fragmentation that are faced by decentralized organizations and also how these can be overcome.

The chapter represents the most complete and comprehensive review of the theory of relational cohesion, the affect theory of social exchange, and the theory of social commitments to date.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of exchange modes – negotiated, reciprocal, generalized, and productive – on inter-employee knowledge sharing.

Based on the affect theory of social exchange, a theoretical model was developed and empirically tested using a survey of 691 employees from 15 North American credit unions.

The negotiated mode of knowledge exchange, i.e. when a knowledge contributor explicitly establishes reciprocation conditions with a recipient, develops negative knowledge sharing attitude. The reciprocal mode, i.e. when a knowledge donor assumes that a receiver will reciprocate, has no effect on knowledge sharing attitude. The generalized exchange form, i.e. when a knowledge contributor believes that other organizational members may reciprocate, is weakly related to knowledge sharing attitude. The productive exchange mode, i.e. when a knowledge provider assumes he or she is a responsible citizen within a cooperative enterprise, strongly facilitates the development of knowledge sharing attitude, which, in turn, leads to knowledge sharing intentions.

To facilitate inter-employee knowledge sharing, managers should focus on the development of positive knowledge sharing culture when all employees believe they contribute to a common good instead of expecting reciprocal benefits.

This is one of the first studies to apply the affect theory of social exchange to study knowledge sharing.

Mentoring postdocs is a shared responsibility and dynamic process that requires a mutual commitment between the faculty mentor and postdoc. The purpose of this study is to understand how minoritized science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) postdocs view and engage in mentoring exchanges with their faculty mentors. In the context of this study, minoritized postdocs include women, people of color, and individuals with international status; faculty mentors include postdocs’ Principal Investigators (PIs).

Three researchers and 31 data sources (i.e., interview transcripts) were used to construct the case. Researchers first deductively and independently coded the data sources using Molm’s (2006) social exchange framework to identify examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges. Researchers then used thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) to identify emergent themes among coded examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges.

Data analyses revealed three emergent themes: (1.1) postdocs valued regular meetings and communication with mentors to clarify responsibilities and role expectations, (1.2) postdocs found more value in their interactions with junior faculty PIs who were flexible and open to innovative ideas, and (1.3) postdocs appreciated conversations about short- and long-term career goals and advice with mentors.

Findings offer implications for faculty and postdocs’ approaches to mentoring relationships, and for approaches to cultivating supportive scholarly communities in STEM higher education. Recommendations include flexibility in research assignments, increased awareness of non-academic careers, and opportunities for informal interactions and intra/interdepartmental community building.

To investigate two explanations for how variations in social network structure might produce differences in cognitive and perceptual orientation. One explanation is that the extent to which structures lead people to feel strong social bonds encourages holism. The other is that the extent to which a network leads individuals to be concerned about distal network relations leads to holistic thinking.

An experimental study in which participants interacted in three-person networks of negotiated (with or without a one-exchange rule), generalized, or productive exchange before being administered the framed-line test, a common measure of cognitive and perceptual orientation.

Participants in network structures more likely to lead participants to be concerned about what was happening in relationships in the network of which they were not part performed relatively more holistically on the framed-line test. However, these effects did not extend to both modules of the test, and a check on the ordering of networks as reflecting concern with distal network relationships failed.

The experimental design was structured such that only one of the presented explanations could possibly be supported, whereas they both could be correct. Nevertheless, results do indicate that cognitive orientation did respond to variations in network structure.

Explanations for cultural differences typically implicate social structure, although the explanations often cannot be directly tested. Results show that social structure can produce effects that mirror differences thought to reflect profound cultural variations.

This article addresses the lack of scholarly attention paid to the sharing economy from a sociological perspective, with respect to the technology-mediated interactions between sharing economy users. The paper provides a critical overview of the sharing economy and its impact on business and communities and explores how information technology can facilitate authentic, genuine sharing through exercising and enabling conviviality and non-direct reciprocity.

The paper begins with a critique of the technology-mediated sharing economy, introduces the concept of conviviality as a tool to grow and shape community and sustainability within the sharing economy and then explores reciprocity and sharing behaviour. Finally, the paper draws upon social exchange theory to illustrate conviviality and reciprocity, using four case studies of technology-enabled sharing.

The paper contributes to the emerging debate around how the sharing economy, driven by information systems and technology, affects social cohesion and personal relationships. The paper elucidates the central role conviviality and reciprocity play in explaining the paradoxes, tensions and impact of the sharing economy on society. Conviviality and reciprocity are positioned as key capabilities of a more sustainable version of the sharing economy, enabled via information technology.

The findings reveal that information technology-mediated sharing enterprises should promote conviviality and reciprocity in order to deliver more positive environmental, economic and social benefits. The diversity of existing operations indicated by the findings and the controversies discussed will guide the critical study of the social potential of sharing economy to avoid treating all sharing alike.

While classical exchange theorists excluded bargaining from the scope of their theories, most contemporary theorists have done the opposite, concentrating exclusively on negotiated exchanges with binding agreements. This chapter describes the theoretical logic and empirical results of a new program of research comparing the effects of reciprocal and negotiated forms of exchange. As the work shows, fundamental differences between the two forms of exchange affect many of the processes addressed by current theories. Reciprocal exchanges produce weaker power use, greater feelings of trust and affective commitment, and stronger perceptions of the partner’s fairness than equivalent negotiated exchanges. I discuss the implications of this work for theories of exchange and social interaction, and outline future directions for the next phase of the research program.