IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0277214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Network diffusion of gender diversity on boards: A process of two-speed opposing forces

Author

Listed:
  • Ricardo Gimeno
  • Ruth Mateos de Cabo
  • Pilar Grau
  • Patricia Gabaldon

Abstract

Network diffusion processes or how information spreads through networks have been widely examined in numerous disciplines such as epidemiology, physics, sociology, politics, or computer science. In this paper, we extend previous developments by considering a generalization of the diffusion by considering the possibility of differences in the speed of diffusion and reduction depending on the forces’ directions. In this situation, the differential speed of diffusion produces deviations from the standard solution around the average of the initial conditions in the network. In fact, this asymmetry gives rise to non-linear dynamics in which, contrary to the symmetric case, the final solution depends on the topology of the graph as well as on the distribution of the initial values. Counter-intuitively, less central nodes in the network are able to exert a higher influence on the final solution. This behavior applies also for different simulated networks such as random, small-world, and scale-free. We show an example of this kind of asymmetric diffusion process in a real case. To do so, we use a network of US Boards of Directors, where boards are the nodes and the directors working for more than one board, are the links. Changes in the proportion of women serving on each board are influenced by the gradient between adjacent boards. We also show that there is an asymmetry: the gradient is reduced at a slower (faster) rhythm if the board has less (more) women than neighboring boards. We are able to quantify the accumulated effect of this asymmetry from 2000 to 2015 in the overall proportion of women on boards, in a 4.7 percentage points (the proportion should have been an 14.61% instead of the observed 9.93% in 2015).

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo Gimeno & Ruth Mateos de Cabo & Pilar Grau & Patricia Gabaldon, 2022. "Network diffusion of gender diversity on boards: A process of two-speed opposing forces," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-18, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0277214
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0277214
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0277214&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0277214?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gallegati Mauro & Greenwald Bruce & Richiardi Matteo G & Stiglitz Joseph E., 2008. "The Asymmetric Effect of Diffusion Processes: Risk Sharing and Contagion," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 8(3), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Matthew O. Jackson & Agathe Pernoud, 2021. "Systemic Risk in Financial Networks: A Survey," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 171-202, August.
    3. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    4. Terjesen, Siri & Sealy, Ruth, 2016. "Board Gender Quotas: Exploring Ethical Tensions From A Multi-Theoretical Perspective," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 23-65, January.
    5. Mile Šikić & Alen Lančić & Nino Antulov-Fantulin & Hrvoje Štefančić, 2013. "Epidemic centrality — is there an underestimated epidemic impact of network peripheral nodes?," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 86(10), pages 1-13, October.
    6. Duncan J. Watts & Peter Sheridan Dodds, 2007. "Influentials, Networks, and Public Opinion Formation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 441-458, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Silvio Vismara, 2018. "Information Cascades among Investors in Equity Crowdfunding," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(3), pages 467-497, May.
    2. Yan Lin & Wai Fong Boh, 2020. "How different Are crowdfunders? Examining archetypes of crowdfunders," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1357-1370, November.
    3. Stiglitz Joseph E., 2010. "Contagion, Liberalization, and the Optimal Structure of Globalization," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-47, December.
    4. Junjie Zhou & Ying-Ju Chen, 2016. "Targeted Information Release in Social Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 721-735, June.
    5. Desmarchelier, Benoît & Fang, Eddy S., 2016. "National culture and innovation diffusion. Exploratory insights from agent-based modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 121-128.
    6. Benjamin Cabrera & Björn Ross & Daniel Röchert & Felix Brünker & Stefan Stieglitz, 2021. "The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1331-1355, November.
    7. Lu, Jie, 2015. "Varieties of Governance in China: Migration and Institutional Change in Chinese Villages," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199378746, Decembrie.
    8. Radu Tanase & Claudio J Tessone & René Algesheimer, 2018. "Identification of influencers through the wisdom of crowds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    9. Rubin, Jared, 2014. "Centralized institutions and cascades," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 340-357.
    10. Anjana Susarla & Jeong-Ha Oh & Yong Tan, 2012. "Social Networks and the Diffusion of User-Generated Content: Evidence from YouTube," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, March.
    11. repec:plo:pone00:0080380 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Declan Mungovan & Enda Howley & Jim Duggan, 2011. "The influence of random interactions and decision heuristics on norm evolution in social networks," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 152-178, May.
    13. repec:plo:pone00:0084592 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Runshan Fu & Ginger Zhe Jin & Meng Liu, 2022. "Does Human-algorithm Feedback Loop Lead to Error Propagation? Evidence from Zillow’s Zestimate," NBER Working Papers 29880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Kathy Fogel & Liping Ma & Randall Morck, 2021. "Powerful independent directors," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(4), pages 935-983, December.
    16. Alvarez, Emiliano & Brida, Juan Gabriel, 2019. "What about the others? Consensus and equilibria in the presence of self-interest and conformity in social groups," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 518(C), pages 285-298.
    17. Thomas Chesney, 2017. "The Cascade Capacity Predicts Individuals to Seed for Diffusion Through Social Networks," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 51-61, January.
    18. Joohyun Kim & Ohsung Kwon & Duk Hee Lee, 2019. "Observing Cascade Behavior Depending on the Network Topology and Transaction Costs," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 53(1), pages 207-225, January.
    19. Ray M. Chang & Wonseok Oh & Alain Pinsonneault & Dowan Kwon, 2010. "A Network Perspective of Digital Competition in Online Advertising Industries: A Simulation-Based Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 571-593, September.
    20. Chong (Alex) Wang & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Il-Horn Hann, 2018. "Socially Nudged: A Quasi-Experimental Study of Friends’ Social Influence in Online Product Ratings," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 641-655, September.
    21. Tuan Q. Phan & David Godes, 2018. "The Evolution of Influence Through Endogenous Link Formation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 259-278, March.
    22. Chang, Eric C. & Cheng, Joseph W. & Khorana, Ajay, 2000. "An examination of herd behavior in equity markets: An international perspective," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(10), pages 1651-1679, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0277214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.