skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Mechanisms of Network Formation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Abstract This article provides a systematic review of the network formation literature in the public sector. In particular, we code and categorize the theoretical mechanisms used in empirical network research to motivate collaboration and tie formation. Based on a review of the 107 articles on network formation found in 40 journals of public administration and policy from 1998 to 2019, we identify 15 distinct theoretical categories. For each category, we describe the theory, highlight its use in the literature, and identify limitations and concerns with current applications. Overall, we find that most studies rely on a similar set of general theories of network formation. More importantly, we find that most theoretical mechanisms are not well specified, and empirical tests are often unable to directly assess the specific underlying mechanism. The results of our review highlight the need for our field to embrace experimental designs, develop panel network datasets, and engage in more network-level research.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1646395
PAR ID:
10208616
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Perspectives on Public Management and Governance
ISSN:
2398-4910
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Co-production has become a cornerstone of research within the sustainability sciences, motivating collaborations of diverse actors to conduct research in the service of societal and policy change. This review examines theoretical and empirical literature from sustainability science, public administration, and science and technology studies (STS) with the intention of advancing the theory and practice of co-production within sustainability science. We argue that co-production must go beyond stakeholder engagement by scientists to the more deliberate design of societal transitions. Co-production can contribute to such transitions by shifting the institutional arrangements that govern relationships between knowledge and power, science and society, and state and citizens. We highlight critical weaknesses in conceptualizations of co-production within sustainability sciences with respect to power, politics, and governance. We offer suggestions for how this can be rectified through deeper engagement with public administration and STS to offer a broad vision for enhancing the use, design, and practice of a more reflexive co-production in sustainability science. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Environment and Resources Volume 44 is October 17, 2019. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. 
    more » « less
  2. In this theory paper, we set out to consider, as a matter of methodological interest, the use of quantitative measures of inter-coder reliability (e.g., percentage agreement, correlation, Cohen’s Kappa, etc.) as necessary and/or sufficient correlates for quality within qualitative research in engineering education. It is well known that the phrase qualitative research represents a diverse body of scholarship conducted across a range of epistemological viewpoints and methodologies. Given this diversity, we concur with those who state that it is ill advised to propose recipes or stipulate requirements for achieving qualitative research validity and reliability. Yet, as qualitative researchers ourselves, we repeatedly find the need to communicate the validity and reliability—or quality—of our work to different stakeholders, including funding agencies and the public. One method for demonstrating quality, which is increasingly used in qualitative research in engineering education, is the practice of reporting quantitative measures of agreement between two or more people who code the same qualitative dataset. In this theory paper, we address this common practice in two ways. First, we identify instances in which inter-coder reliability measures may not be appropriate or adequate for establishing quality in qualitative research. We query research that suggests that the numerical measure itself is the goal of qualitative analysis, rather than the depth and texture of the interpretations that are revealed. Second, we identify complexities or methodological questions that may arise during the process of establishing inter-coder reliability, which are not often addressed in empirical publications. To achieve this purposes, in this paper we will ground our work in a review of qualitative articles, published in the Journal of Engineering Education, that have employed inter-rater or inter-coder reliability as evidence of research validity. In our review, we will examine the disparate measures and scores (from 40% agreement to 97% agreement) used as evidence of quality, as well as the theoretical perspectives within which these measures have been employed. Then, using our own comparative case study research as an example, we will highlight the questions and the challenges that we faced as we worked to meet rigorous standards of evidence in our qualitative coding analysis, We will explain the processes we undertook and the challenges we faced as we assigned codes to a large qualitative data set approached from a post positivist perspective. We will situate these coding processes within the larger methodological literature and, in light of contrasting literature, we will describe the principled decisions we made while coding our own data. We will use this review of qualitative research and our own qualitative research experiences to elucidate inconsistencies and unarticulated issues related to evidence for qualitative validity as a means to generate further discussion regarding quality in qualitative coding processes. 
    more » « less
  3. <italic>Abstract</italic> Cryptocurrencies and the underpinning blockchain technology have gained unprecedented public attention recently. In contrast to fiat currencies, transactions of cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin and Litecoin, are permanently recorded on distributed ledgers to be seen by the public. As a result, public availability of all cryptocurrency transactions allows us to create a complex network of financial interactions that can be used to study not only the blockchain graph, but also the relationship between various blockchain network features and cryptocurrency risk investment. We introduce a novel concept of chainlets, or blockchain motifs, to utilize this information. Chainlets allow us to evaluate the role of local topological structure of the blockchain on the joint Bitcoin and Litecoin price formation and dynamics. We investigate the predictive Granger causality of chainlets and identify certain types of chainlets that exhibit the highest predictive influence on cryptocurrency price and investment risk. More generally, while statistical aspects of blockchain data analytics remain virtually unexplored, the paper aims to highlight various emerging theoretical, methodological and applied research challenges of blockchain data analysis that will be of interest to the broad statistical community.The Canadian Journal of Statistics48: 561–581; 2020 © 2020 Statistical Society of Canada 
    more » « less
  4. Even in our highly interconnected modern world, geographic factors play an important role in human social connections. Similarly, social relationships influence how and where we travel, and how we think about our spatial world. Here, we review the growing body of neuroscience research that is revealing multiple interactions between social and spatial processes in both humans and non-human animals. We review research on the cognitive and neural representation of spatial and social information, and highlight recent findings suggesting that underlying mechanisms might be common to both. We discuss how spatial factors can influence social behaviour, and how social concepts modify representations of space. In so doing, this review elucidates not only how neural representations of social and spatial information interact but also similarities in how the brain represents and operates on analogous information about its social and spatial surroundings. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The spatial–social interface: a theoretical and empirical integration’. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    Males that exhibit alternative reproductive tactics (ARTs) often differ in the risk of sperm competition and the energetic trade-offs they experience. The resulting patterns of selection could lead to between-tactic differences in ejaculate traits. Despite extensive research on male ARTs, there is no comprehensive review of whether and what differences in sperm traits exist between male ARTs. We review existing theory on ejaculate evolution relevant to ARTs and then conduct a comprehensive vote-counting review of the empirical data comparing sperm traits between males adopting ARTs. Despite the general expectation that sneaker males should produce sperm that are more competitive (e.g. higher quality or performance), we find that existing theory does not predict explicitly how males adopting ARTs should differ in sperm traits. The majority of studies find no significant difference in sperm performance traits between dominant and sneaker males. However, when there is a difference, sneaker males tend to have higher sperm performance trait values than dominant males. We propose ways that future theoretical and empirical research can improve our understanding of the evolution of ejaculate traits in ARTs. We then highlight how studying ejaculate traits in species with ARTs will improve our broader knowledge of ejaculate evolution. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Fifty years of sperm competition’. 
    more » « less