The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Power Relations in Exchange Networks
Abstract
Many theories address the problem of how a social structure affects the experiences and behaviors of its members.This paper offers a network-exchange theory to solve this problem.Previous research has shown that the nature and outcomes of negotiations among individual or corporate actors can be inferred from their network positions.The impact of this research has been limited because its theory does not enable the researcher to locate power positions in the networks.We offer a theory that is both consistent with all previously reported experimental research and is generalized to conditions not considered by other formulations.In addition to supporting derived hypotheses pertaining to network-based power, our experiments demonstrate, among other things, that certain unstable networks break down to form stable substructures and that some networks contain overlapping but autonomous domains of power and exchange.Although no single exchange theory dominates the social sciences, a fairly coherent social-exchange perspective exists.In this perspective, social structures and processes impinge on and emerge from resource and sanction transfers between individuals and/or collectivities.'Recently, some theories have moved beyond two-party exchange contexts to focus on networks of exchange relations.As structural theories, network-exchange theories attempt to explain how macro-properties bear upon micro-units within structures.Concretely, they try to show how network structures affect the power of actors to extract valued resources in their exchanges with others.
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
Sahlins, M., & Graeber, D. (2017) · Routledge (orig. 1972) · doi:10.4324/9781315184951 · Cited by 3,159
Do Sociological Theories Grow?
Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (1985) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/228142 · Cited by 242
Cited by
Borgatti, S. P. (2005) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2004.11.008 · Cited by 3,191
The network analysis of urban streets: A dual approach
Porta, S., Crucitti, P., & Latora, V. (2006) · Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2005.12.063 · Cited by 749
Building Solidarity through Generalized Exchange: A Theory of Reciprocity
Molm, L. D., Collett, J. L., & Schaefer, D. R. (2007) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/517900 · Cited by 589
Theoretical Comparisons of Forms of Exchange
Molm, L. D. (2003) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1111/1467-9558.00171 · Cited by 431
2. Is it lonely at the top?: The independence and interdependence of power holders
Lee, F., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2001) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0191-3085(01)23003-2 · Cited by 174
Metadata
- Authors
- Markovsky, B., Willer, D., & Patton, T.
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1988-04
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 220
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2158838679
- Cited by
- 443
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 35.46
- 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: Power Relations in Exchange Networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2095689
- The paper
- Markovsky, B., Willer, D., & Patton, T. (1988). Power Relations in Exchange Networks. American Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095689
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.