喜欢还是需要?论情感在网络行为中的作用

IF 2.7 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Perspectives on Public Management and Governance Pub Date : 2023-02-07 DOI:10.1093/ppmgov/gvac025
M. van der Heijden
{"title":"喜欢还是需要?论情感在网络行为中的作用","authors":"M. van der Heijden","doi":"10.1093/ppmgov/gvac025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Informal networks are crucial for the functioning of public organizations and the quality of government service. Because of this, public administration scholars increasingly theorize on what drives informal network behavior, particularly in terms of whom public officials contact for information or advice. However, existing studies provide a rather rational and strategic account of how such networking occurs, pointing to factors, such as preference similarity, resource availability, and social capital as its main drivers. This article critiques the microfoundations of existing theoretical models, arguing that they (a) potentially require too extensive information-processing capabilities on behalf of individual decision-makers and (b) discount the role that affect and emotive responses are likely to play in the social activity of networked interaction. In response, this article proposes three lines of theorizing on how (interpersonal) affect can be incorporated into theorizing about the network behavior of public officials: (1) affect as a fallback strategy; (2) affect in the driver’s seat; and (3) affect as a decision distorter. Several methods are discussed to empirically pursue the presented lines of theorizing.","PeriodicalId":29947,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liking or Needing? Theorizing on the Role of Affect in Network Behavior\",\"authors\":\"M. van der Heijden\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ppmgov/gvac025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Informal networks are crucial for the functioning of public organizations and the quality of government service. Because of this, public administration scholars increasingly theorize on what drives informal network behavior, particularly in terms of whom public officials contact for information or advice. However, existing studies provide a rather rational and strategic account of how such networking occurs, pointing to factors, such as preference similarity, resource availability, and social capital as its main drivers. This article critiques the microfoundations of existing theoretical models, arguing that they (a) potentially require too extensive information-processing capabilities on behalf of individual decision-makers and (b) discount the role that affect and emotive responses are likely to play in the social activity of networked interaction. In response, this article proposes three lines of theorizing on how (interpersonal) affect can be incorporated into theorizing about the network behavior of public officials: (1) affect as a fallback strategy; (2) affect in the driver’s seat; and (3) affect as a decision distorter. Several methods are discussed to empirically pursue the presented lines of theorizing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

非正式网络对公共组织的运作和政府服务的质量至关重要。正因为如此,公共管理学者越来越多地从理论上探讨是什么驱动了非正式网络行为,特别是在公共官员与谁联系以获取信息或建议方面。然而,现有的研究对这种网络是如何发生的提供了一个相当理性和战略性的解释,指出了偏好相似性、资源可用性和社会资本等因素是其主要驱动因素。本文批评了现有理论模型的微观基础,认为它们(a)可能需要代表个体决策者的过于广泛的信息处理能力,(b)低估了影响和情绪反应在网络互动的社会活动中可能发挥的作用。作为回应,本文提出了三条关于如何将(人际)影响纳入公职人员网络行为的理论化思路:(1)影响作为一种后备策略;(二)影响驾驶员座位;(3)作为决策扭曲者的影响。讨论了几种方法,以经验追求提出的理论路线。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Liking or Needing? Theorizing on the Role of Affect in Network Behavior
Informal networks are crucial for the functioning of public organizations and the quality of government service. Because of this, public administration scholars increasingly theorize on what drives informal network behavior, particularly in terms of whom public officials contact for information or advice. However, existing studies provide a rather rational and strategic account of how such networking occurs, pointing to factors, such as preference similarity, resource availability, and social capital as its main drivers. This article critiques the microfoundations of existing theoretical models, arguing that they (a) potentially require too extensive information-processing capabilities on behalf of individual decision-makers and (b) discount the role that affect and emotive responses are likely to play in the social activity of networked interaction. In response, this article proposes three lines of theorizing on how (interpersonal) affect can be incorporated into theorizing about the network behavior of public officials: (1) affect as a fallback strategy; (2) affect in the driver’s seat; and (3) affect as a decision distorter. Several methods are discussed to empirically pursue the presented lines of theorizing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
Not Whether to Coordinate, But How: Concerns and Mechanism Choice Under a Mandate for Inter-Agency Coordination What Is The Public? A Pragmatic Analysis of a Core Concept in Public Administration The Flawed Foundations of Social Equity in Public Administration: A Racial Contract Theory Critique The Procedural Politicking Tug of War: Law-Versus-Management Disputes in Contexts of Democratic Backsliding Producing Agreements and Innovations in Collaborative Governance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1