The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills
Abstract
There has been rapid growth in the study of diffusion across organizations and social movements in recent years, fueled by interest in institutional arguments and in network and dynamic analysis. This research develops a sociologically grounded account of change emphasizing the channels along which practices flow. Our review focuses on characteristic lines of argument, emphasizing the structural and cultural logic of diffusion processes. We argue for closer theoretical attention to why practices diffuse at different rates and via different pathways in different settings. Three strategies for further development are proposed: broader comparative research designs, closer inspection of the content of social relations between collective actors, and more attention to diffusion industries run by the media and communities of experts.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Institutional conditions for diffusion
Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. (1993) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1007/bf00993595 · Cited by 2,114
Self-citationAbrahamson, E. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258636 · Cited by 1,828
Cited by
What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?
Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772751 · Cited by 6,652
Group formation in large social networks: membership, growth, and evolution
Backstrom, L., Huttenlocher, D., Kleinberg, J., & Lan, X. (2006) · Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/1150402.1150412 · Cited by 1,805
Toward a General Theory of Strategic Action Fields
Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2011) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2010.01385.x · Cited by 1,367
Romero, D. M., Meeder, B., & Kleinberg, J. (2011) · Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1963405.1963503 · Cited by 1,082
Implementation, context and complexity
May, C. R., Johnson, M., & Finch, T. (2016) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0506-3 · Cited by 978
Metadata
- Authors
- Strang, D., & Soule, S. A.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Sociology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1998-08
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 265-290
- ISSN
- 0360-0572 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2115
- OpenAlex
- W2169090121
- Cited by
- 1,678
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.265
- The paper
- Strang, D., & Soule, S. A. (1998). Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills. Annual Review of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.265
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
