Hosting the comfortably exotic: Cosmopolitan aspirations in the sharing economy
Abstract
This article draws on interviews with 43 Airbnb hosts in Greater Boston to analyze how this novel economic arrangement brings people together across difference. The first central finding is that a majority of the participants express a keen interest in engaging with the Other, by hosting guests of foreign nationalities and cultures, but they also filter for familiar characteristics. This paradox is conceptualized as a preference for the ‘comfortably exotic’ – hosts want difference, but not too much of it. The second central finding is that guest–host interactions generate cosmopolitan capital, i.e., particular forms of social and cultural capital, which suggests that exclusion from the home-sharing economy has opportunity costs on not just economic dimensions, but also on cultural and social dimensions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Daring to share houses, rides, and other services enables participating parties to forge new contacts.
“Daring to share houses, rides, and other service enables participating parties to forge new contacts (Ladegaard, 2018), is often more convenient”
From The Consequences of Participating in the Sharing Economy: A Transparency-Based Sharing Framework (2021) · cites this paper as Ladegaard, 2018
Cites
A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006) · Journal of personality and social psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 · Cited by 8,964 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Internet-mediated interactions and the sharing economy The contact hypothesis suggests that positive intergroup encounters will under certain circumstances improve intergroup relations (Allport, 1954/1979; for reviews, see Pettigrew, 1998; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).”
BackgroundThe digital divide shifts to differences in usage
van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2014) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444813487959 · Cited by 1,733 · see citing works
Digital Discrimination: The Case of Airbnb.com
Edelman, B. G., & Luca, M. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2377353 · Cited by 471 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Consequences of Participating in the Sharing Economy: A Transparency-Based Sharing Framework
C. Köbis, N., Soraperra, I., & Shalvi, S. (2021) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206320967740 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ladegaard, I.
- Affiliations
- Boston College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ladegaard, Isak
- ORCID
- Ladegaard, Isak
- Venue
- The Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-03
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 381-400
- ISSN
- 0038-0261 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-954X
- OpenAlex
- W2793638317
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 11.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
- The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Sharing Economy and Platforms
- Social Sciences › Demography › Migration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
- Keywords
- sharing economy, Airbnb, home sharing, cosmopolitanism, cosmopolitan capital, cultural capital, social capital, exoticism, otherness, host-guest relations, exclusion, foreign guests, Greater Boston
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