Erratum: A network’s gender composition and communication pattern predict women’s leadership success (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2019) 116 (2033–2038) DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1721438116);A network's gender composition and communication pattern predict women's leadership success

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 116, Issue 6, 2019, Pages 2033-2038

  Yang, Yang ^a,b   Chawla, Nitesh V ^c   Uzzi, Brian ^a,b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (United States)

Author keywords

Computational social science; Gender inequality; Leadership; Social network; STEM

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; E-MAIL; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLE ANALYSIS; LEADERSHIP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; SEX RATIO; SOCIAL NETWORK; SOCIOLOGY; STUDENT; WORK EXPERIENCE; WRITING; GENDER IDENTITY; GROUP PROCESS; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; SEX FACTOR;

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE; COMMUNICATION; FEMALE; GENDER IDENTITY; GROUP PROCESSES; HUMANS; LEADERSHIP; MALE; SEX FACTORS; SEX RATIO; SOCIAL NETWORKING; STUDENTS;

EID: 85061113683     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1903864116     Document Type: Erratum

References (52)

1. Holt N (2016) Rise of the Rocket Girls: The Women Who Propelled Us, from Missiles to the Moon to Mars (Little, Brown, New York).
2. Beaman L, Chattopadhyay R, Duflo E, Pande R, Topalova P (2009) Powerful women: Does exposure reduce bias? Q J Econ 124:1497-1540.
3. Beede D, et al. (2011) Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation, Economics and Statistics Administration Issue Brief 04-11 (US Department of Commerce, Washington, DC).
4. Matsa DA, Miller AR (2011) Chipping away at the glass ceiling: Gender spillovers in corporate leadership. Am Econ Rev 101:635-639.
5. Hultin M, Szulkin R (1999) Wages and unequal access to organizational power: An empirical test of gender discrimination. Administrative Sci Q 44:453-472.
6. Sandberg S (2013) Lean in: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead (Random House, New York).
7. Etkowitz H, Kemelgor C, Uzzi B (2000) The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology (Athena Unbound, Cambridge, UK).
8. Etzkowitz H, Kemelgor C, Neuschatz M, Uzzi B, Alonzo J (1994) The paradox of critical mass for women in science. Science 266:51-54.
9. Alison MK, Cannings K, Goldberg CB (2010) Asymmetrical demography effects on psychological climate for gender diversity: Differential effects of leader gender and work unit gender composition among Swedish doctors. Hum Relat 63: 1661-1685.
10. Ely RJ (1995) The power in demography: Women's social constructions of gender identity at work. Acad Management J 38:589-634.
11. Webster C, Grusky O, Podus D, Young A (1999) Team leadership: Network differences in women's and men's instrumental and expressive relations. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res 26:169-190.
12. Foley S, Linnehan F, Greenhaus JH, Weer CH (2006) The impact of gender similarity, racial similarity, and work culture on family-supportive supervision. Group Organ Management 31:420-441.
13. Shin T (2012) The gender gap in executive compensation: The role of female directors and chief executive officers. Ann Am Acad Polit Social Sci 639:258-278.
14. Cohen LE, Broschak JP (2013) Whose jobs are these? The impact of the proportion of female managers on the number of new management jobs filled by women versus men. Administrative Sci Q 58:509-541.
15. Phillips DJ (2005) Organizational genealogies and the persistence of gender inequality: The case of Silicon Valley law firms. Administrative Sci Q 50:440-472.
16. Dennehy TC, Dasgupta N (2017) Female peer mentors early in college increase women's positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114:5964-5969.
17. Dasgupta N, Scircle MM, Hunsinger M (2015) Female peers in small work groups enhance women's motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:4988-4993.
18. Moss-Racusin CA, Dovidio JF, Brescoll VL, Graham MJ, Handelsman J (2012) Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:16474-16479.
19. Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (2007) Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (National Academies Press, Washington, DC).
20. Oliveira DFM, Ma Y, Woodruff T, Uzzi B, Gender gaps in NIH funding and grant leadership at the Big Ten and Ivy League universities, 2006-2017. J Am Med Assoc, in press.
21. Belliveau M (2005) Blind ambition? The effects of social networks and institutional sex composition on the job search outcomes of elite coeducational and women's college graduates. Organ Sci 16:134-150.
22. Byrne JA (May 31, 2014) Why the MBA has become the most popular master's degree in the U.S. Fortune. Available at fortune.com/2014/05/31/mba-popular-masters-degree/. Accessed October 25, 2017.
23. Shue K (2013) Executive networks and firm policies: Evidence from the random assignment of MBA peers. Rev Financ Stud 26:1401-1442.
24. Castilla EJ (2011) Bringing managers back in: Managerial influences on workplace inequality. Am Sociol Rev 76:667-694.
25. Fernandez RM, Mors ML (2008) Competing for jobs: Labor queues and gender sorting in the hiring process. Soc Sci Res 37:1061-1080.
26. Rivera LA (2016) Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs (Princeton Univ Press, Princeton).
27. Fernandez RM, Weinberg N (1997) Sifting and sorting: Personal contacts and hiring in a retail bank. Am Sociol Rev 62:883-902.
28. Rivera LA (2012) Hiring as cultural matching: The case of elite professional service firms. Am Sociol Rev 77:999-1022.
29. Lutter M (2015) Do women suffer from network closure? The moderating effect of social capital on gender inequality in a project-based labor market, 1929 to 2010. Am Sociol Rev 80:329-358.
30. Aral S, Van Alstyne M (2011) The diversity-bandwidth trade-off. Am J Sociol 117:90-171.
31. Rivera MT, Soderstrom SB, Uzzi B (2010) Dynamics of dyads in social networks: Assortative, relational, and proximity mechanisms. Annu Rev Sociol 36: 91-115.
32. Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Sci Q 42:35-67.
33. Granovetter MS (1977) The strength of weak ties. Social Networks (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 347-367.
34. Deming DJ (2017) The growing importance of social skills in the labor market. Q J Econ 132:1593-1640.
35. Davies NM, Smith GD, Windmeijer F, Martin RM (2013) Issues in the reporting and conduct of instrumental variable studies: A systematic review. Epidemiology 24:363-369.
36. Staiger DO, Stock JH (1994) Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments. NBER Technical Working Paper 151 (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).
37. Finkelstein S (1992) Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Acad Management J 35:505-538.
38. Mertler CA (2002) Using standardized test data to guide instruction and intervention. Eric Digest.
39. Romero DM, Uzzi B, Kleinberg J (2016) Social networks under stress. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web (International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Geneva), pp 9-20.
40. Kossinets G, Watts DJ (2006) Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science 311:88-90.
41. Wuchty S, Uzzi B (2011) Human communication dynamics in digital footsteps: A study of the agreement between self-reported ties and email networks. PLoS One 6: e26972.
42. Eagle N, Pentland AS, Lazer D (2009) Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:15274-15278.
43. Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK), Vol 8.
44. Bearman PS, Moody J, Stovel K (2004) Chains of affection: The structure of adolescent romantic and sexual networks. Am J Sociol 110:44-91.
45. Brown R, Brown J, Reardon K, Merrill C (2011) Understanding STEM: Current perceptions. Technology Eng Teacher 70:5-9.
46. Burt RS (2009) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, MA).
47. Hoxby C (2000) Peer effects in the classroom: Learning from gender and race variation. NBER Working Paper 7867 (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).
48. Sacerdote B (2001) Peer effects with random assignment: Results for Dartmouth roommates. Q J Econ 116:681-704.
49. Stuart EA (2010) Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Stat Science: A Rev J Inst Math Stat 25:1-21.
50. Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2012) Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Polit Anal 20:1-24.
51. Ragins BR, Townsend B, Mattis M (1998) Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Acad Management Perspect 12:28-42.
52. Hakimi SL (1962) On realizability of a set of integers as degrees of the vertices of a linear graph. I. J Soc Ind Appl Math 10:496-506.