MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021612467 · doi:10.1111/etap.12102

Network Closure or Structural Hole? The Conditioning Effects of Network–Level Social Capital on Innovation Performance

2014· article· en· W2021612467 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Capital and Networks
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentralitySocial capitalStructural holesBridging (networking)Social network (sociolinguistics)EconomicsBusinessMicroeconomicsSociologyComputer scienceSocial media

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study contributes to the bonding–bridging debate in the social capital literature by examining the conditioning effects of collective social capital. Data generated from simulation reveals that network density, a measure of network–level social capital, negatively moderates the impacts of firm–level social capitals, measured separately by degree centrality and structural hole, on a firm's innovation performance. Specifically, in low–density networks, degree centrality and structural holes are complementary at enhancing innovation performance. In high–density networks, the positive impact of degree centrality weakens and structural holes turn out to be detrimental. The findings not only advance our understanding of the cross–level dynamics of social capital, but also provide a possible explanation for the mixed empirical results found in previous studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it