Diane Felmlee

Bio: Diane Felmlee is an academic researcher from Pennsylvania State University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Friendship & Social network. The author has an hindex of 33, co-authored 85 publications receiving 3343 citations. Previous affiliations of Diane Felmlee include University of California, Davis & Indiana University.

Status Struggles: Network Centrality and Gender Segregation in Same- and Cross-Gender Aggression

Abstract: Literature on aggression often suggests that individual deficiencies, such as social incompetence, psychological difficulties, or troublesome home environments, are responsible for aggressive behav...

The dissolution of intimate relationships: a Hazard model

Abstract: We conducted a longitudinal investigation to advance our understanding of determinants of the breakups of premarital relationships. We considered causes, derived from several major theories, that were located in a variety of sources ― in the relationship, in the social network environment, and in the individual. In the analyses we examined how measures of different factors affected the rate at which a relationship changed from intact to broken up

No Couple Is an Island: A Social Network Perspective on Dyadic Stability

Abstract: Social networks have a relatively large and multifaceted effect on the stability of intimate relationships, based on proportional hazard analysis involving 290 individuals. Perceptions of approval from a respondent's friends and approval from a partner's family increase relationship stability. On the other hand, perceived approval from a respondent's family, overall encouragement to date, and closeness to a best friend decrease stability in the multivariate model. Perceptions of social approval are better at predicting stability than actual approval. The effects of social networks occur even after controlling for the significant effects of dyadic variables such as the perceived existence of alternatives, closeness to the partner, and arguing. Findings confirm the positive and negative roles of social ties and support the argument that friendships can compete with romantic relationships for companionship.

Factors Associated with Distress Following the Breakup of a Close Relationship

Abstract: The purpose of this investigation was to identify the factors associated with the distress experienced after the breakup of a romantic relationship, both at the time of the breakup (assessed retrospectively) and at the time the questionnaire was completed. Four categories of variables were examined as possible correlates of post-breakup distress: variables associated with the initiation of the relationship, characteristics of the relationship while it was intact, conditions at the time of the breakup and individual difference variables. The sample consisted of 257 young adults (primarily college students; 83 male and 174 female) who had experienced a recent breakup (M = 21 weeks since breakup). The variables most highly associated with distress at the time of the breakup were non-mutuality in alternatives (i.e. partner having more inter-est in alternatives), commitment, satisfaction, greater effort in relationship initiation, being `left' by the other and fearful attachment style. The variables most highl...

In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA (Harvard University Press) 1982.

Abstract: Introduction 1. Woman's Place in Man's Life Cycle 2. Images of Relationship 3. Concepts of Self and Morality 4. Crisis and Transition 5. Women's Rights and Women's Judgment 6. Visions of Maturity References Index of Study Participants General Index

Social Exchange Theory.

Abstract: Much of social life involves interactions between individuals or corporate actors in dyads, groups, organizations or networks that can be viewed as social exchanges. This chapter presents an overview of the main theories of social exchange focusing on the key contributors in sociology, including George Homans, Peter Blau, Richard M. Emerson and those whose work subsequently built on their original formulations. The theories that have been developed in recent decades have focused on the social structures created by repeated exchanges and the ways in which these structures both constrain and enable actors to exercise power and influence. Other related social processes addressed within the exchange tradition include interpersonal commitment, trust, fairness, procedural and distributive justice, coalition formation and collective action. Recent work also focuses on emotions and their role in social exchange. The methodological challenges of studying social exchange in the laboratory and in the world outside the lab are addressed as well as links between exchange theory and topics under study by economic sociologists and network scholars more broadly, including Internet-mediated exchanges and their growing significance.

Economy and Society

Abstract: The four Visegrad states — Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia (until 1993 Czechoslovakia) and Hungary — form a compact area between Germany and Austria in the west and the states of the former USSR in the east. They are bounded by the Baltic in the north and the Danube river in the south. They are cut by the Sudeten and Carpathian mountain ranges, which divide Poland off from the other states. Poland is an extension of the North European plain and like the latter is drained by rivers that flow from south to north west — the Oder, the Vlatava and the Elbe, the Vistula and the Bug. The Danube is the great exception, flowing from its source eastward, turning through two 90-degree turns to end up in the Black Sea, forming the barrier and often the political frontier between central Europe and the Balkans. Hungary to the east of the Danube is also an open plain. The region is historically and culturally part of western Europe, but its eastern Marches now represents a vital strategic zone between Germany and the core of the European Union to the west and the Russian zone to the east.

Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research

Abstract: Evaluating scientific quality is a notoriously difficult problem which has no standard solution. Ideally, published scientific results should be scrutinised by true experts in the field and given scores for quality and quantity according to established rules. In practice, however, what is called peer review is usually performed by committees with general competence rather than with the specialist's insight that is needed to assess primary research data. Committees tend, therefore, to resort to secondary criteria like crude publication counts, journal prestige, the reputation of authors and institutions, and estimated importance and relevance of the research field,1 making peer review as much of a lottery as of a rational process.2 3 On this background, it is hardly surprising that alternative methods for evaluating research are being sought, such as citation rates and journal impact factors, which seem to be quantitative and objective indicators directly related to published science. The citation data are obtained from a database produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) in Philadelphia, which continuously records scientific citations as represented by the reference lists of articles from a large number of the world's scientific journals. The references are rearranged in the database to show how many times each publication has been cited within a certain period, and by whom, and the results are published as the Science Citation Index (SCI) . On the basis of the Science Citation Index and authors' publication lists, the annual citation rate of papers by a scientific author or research group can thus be calculated. Similarly, the citation rate of a scientific journal—known as the journal impact factor—can be calculated as the mean citation rate of all the articles contained in the journal.4 Journal impact factors, which are published annually in SCI Journal Citation Reports , are widely regarded as …

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Abstract: What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.