The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The consequences of category spanning depend on contrast
Abstract
Recent research finds that producers assigned to multiple categories receive less attention and legitimacy and have lower chances of success and survival. We argue that the effect of category spanning on the reception from the audience depends on the fuzziness of the categories. When a set of categories lacks contrast (have very fuzzy boundaries), spanning them does not cause much additional confusion for the audience, thus the penalties associated with spanning ought to be slight. But, when the contrasts of the categories spanned are high, audience members will have difficulty interpreting the producer, so spanning categories will be devalued more. We study these processes using data from an online-review web site. Results show that audience members devalue organizations that span high-contrast categories more than those that span low-contrast categories. These effects are weaker for more active reviewers.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The ethics-driven market category created by Smith and Leaper and other merchants associated with the East India Company was a "crisp" one in that they had succeeded in distinguishing East Indian sugar, which was generally seen as the product of unambiguously free workers, from the West Indian sugars produced by slaves.
“To use the terminology of Kovács and Hannan (2010), the ethics-driven market category created by Smith and Leaper and other merchants associated with the East India Company was a “crisp” one in that they had succeeded in distinguishing East Indian sugar, which was generally seen as the product of unambiguously free workers, from the West Indian sugars produced by slaves.”
From Historicizing Modern Slavery: Free-Grown Sugar as an Ethics-Driven Market Category in Nineteenth-Century Britain (2020) · cites this paper as Kovács and Hannan 2010
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- 10.1086/209080 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1108/S0733-558X(2010)0000031006 · DOI
- 10.1108/S0733-558X(2010)0000031009 · DOI
- 10.1086/318962 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.riob.2009.06.003 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1086/320821 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00042-5 · DOI
- 10.1080/15326900701326402 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev-soc-021610-092336 · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1467-9558.2003.00192.x · DOI
- Hsu G., 2006, Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 420, 10.2189/asqu.51.3.420 · DOI
- 10.1177/000312240907400108 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.10.1.144 · DOI
- 10.1093/icc/11.1.85 · DOI
- 10.1177/000312240507000605 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192 · DOI
- 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00204.x · DOI
- 10.1086/210178 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cultural Schemas: What They Are, How to Find Them, and What to Do Once You’ve Caught One
Boutyline, A., & Soter, L. K. (2021) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/00031224211024525 · Cited by 216
Smith, A., & Johns, J. (2020) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-019-04318-1 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Kovács, B., & Hannan, M. T.
- Venue
- Research in the Sociology of Organizations
- Publisher
- Emerald Group Publishing Limited
- Published
- 2010-01
- Pages
- 175-201
- ISSN
- 0733-558X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2262816758
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 26.20
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Research in the sociology of organizations (publishedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Stanford Graduate School of Business
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Identity and Reputation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Keywords
- category spanning, organizational legitimacy, audience reception, online reviews, organizational reputation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review