Participation in Helping Networks As Social Capital Mobilization: Impact on Influence for Domestic Men, Domestic Women, and International MBA Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines participation in helping networks among MBA students and its impact on subsequent ratings of influence by peers. Helping networks reflect the mobilization of social capital where network contacts exchange social and material resources. As such, helping networks are distinct from friendship networks, which represent access to social capital but not necessarily its use. We identify three dimensions of social capital mobilization with different effects on status, specifically, mutual helping, nonmutual help giving, and nonmutual help receiving. Findings indicate that social capital mobilization through nonmutual help giving is a positive predictor of influence among peers at a later point in time. Nonmutual help receiving and mutual helping are unrelated to influence when nonmutual help giving is controlled. Gender moderates this relationship, but international student status does not. Nonmutual help giving does not enhance the perceived influence of women, particularly among domestic men. These findings support theories of status devaluation for marginalized groups and have implications for the value of the MBA for female students relative to their male peers. Future research on the predictors and outcomes of social capital mobilization can enhance understanding of the organizational experiences of diverse identity groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it