Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Quelle:Nm/Katz et al 2004

< Quelle:Nm

31.373Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.

Angaben zur Quelle [Bearbeiten]

Autor     Nancy Katz, David Lazer, Holly Arrow, Noshir Contractor
Titel    Network Theory and Small Groups
Zeitschrift    Small Group Research
Datum    June 2004
Nummer    35 (3)
Seiten    307-332
DOI    10.1177/1046496404264941
URL    [1], [2]

Literaturverz.   

yes
Fußnoten    yes
Fragmente    4


Fragmente der Quelle:
[1.] Nm/Fragment 019 16 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2012-04-28 16:27:52 Hindemith
BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Katz et al 2004, Nm, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop

Typus
BauernOpfer
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 19, Zeilen: 16-25
Quelle: Katz et al 2004
Seite(n): 308-309, Zeilen: p.308,23-33 - p.309,1-2
In social network literature, researchers have examined a broad range of types of ties (Katz, N. et al. 2004). These include communication ties (such as who talks to whom or who gives information or advice to whom), formal ties (such as who reports to whom), affective ties (such as who likes whom, or who trust whom), material or work flow ties (such as who gives bomb making material or other resources to whom), proximity ties (who is spatially or electronically close to whom). Networks are typically multiplex, that is, actors share more than one type of tie. For example, two terrorists might have a formal tie (one is foot-[soldier / newly recruited person in terrorist cell and reports to the other, who is the cell leader) and an affective tie (they are friends) and proximity tie (they are residing in the same apartment and their flats are two doors away on the same floor).] [p. 308]

Network researchers have examined a broad range of types of ties. These include communication ties (such as who talks to whom, or who gives information or advice to whom). formal ties (such as who reports to whom), affective ties (such as who likes whom, or who trusts whom). material or work flow ties (such as who gives money or other resources to whom), proximity ties (who is spatially or electronically close to whom), and cognitive ties (such as who knows who knows whom). Networks are typically mutiplex, that is, actors share more than one type of tie. For example, two academic colleagues might have a formal tie (one is an assistant professor and reports to the other. who is the department chairperson)

[p. 309]

and an affective tie (they are friends) and a proximity tie (their offices are two doors away).

Anmerkungen

The exact same section will be used again on pages 93 and 94 of this thesis [3], [4]. Here like there, there is only a passing reference made to the source of this text. Here like there, nothing is marked as a citation.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Agrippina1

[2.] Nm/Fragment 020 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2012-04-28 16:27:59 Hindemith
Fragment, Gesichtet, Katz et al 2004, Nm, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 20, Zeilen: 1-23
Quelle: Katz et al 2004
Seite(n): 308-309, Zeilen: p.308,31-33 - p.309,1-11.13-20
[For example, two terrorists might have a formal tie (one is foot-]soldier / newly recruited person in terrorist cell and reports to the other, who is the cell leader) and an affective tie (they are friends) and proximity tie (they are residing in the same apartment and their flats are two doors away on the same floor).

Network researchers have made a difference between strong ties (such as wife and husband) and weak ties such as colleagues met at a conference (Granovetter, 1973, 1982). This distinction includes affect, mutual obligations, reciprocity, and intensity. Strong ties become valuable when an individual pursues socio-emotional support and should be trustworthy. On the other hand, weak ties become valuable when individuals pursue varied or unique information from external outside their routine contacts.

As per study of the literature, this study found that the ties may be non-directional (Atta attends meeting with Nawaf Alhazmi) or differ in direction (Bin Laden gives advice to Atta vs. Atta gets advice from Bin Laden). They may differ in content (Atta talks with Khalid about the trust of his friends (to be used as human bombs for 9/11) and Khalid about his meeting with Bin Laden), frequency (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.), and medium (frontal conversation, written memos, email, fax, instant messages, live chat, Skype or Facebook messages, etc.). Finally ties may differ in sign, ranging from positive (Iraqis like Zarqawi) to negative (Jordanians dislike Zarqawi).

[p. 308]

For example, two academic colleagues might have a formal tie (one is an assistant professor and reports to the other. who is the department chairperson)

[p.309]

and an affective tie (they are friends) and a proximity tie (their offices are two doors away).

Network researchers have distinguished between strong ties (such as family and friends) and weak ties (such as acquaintances) (Granovetter, 1973. 1982). This distinction can involve a multitude of facets, including affect, mutual obligations, reciprocity, and intensity. Strong ties are particularly valuable when an individual seeks socioemotional support and often entail a high level of trust. Weak ties are more valuable when individuals are seeking diverse or unique information from someone outside their regular frequent contacts. [...]

Ties may be nondirectional (Joe attends a meeting with Jane) or vary in direction (Joe gives advice to Jane vs. Joe gets advice from Jane). They may also vary in content (Joe talks to Jack about the weather and to Jane about sports), frequency (daily. weekly, monthly, etc.), and medium (face-to-face conversation, written memos, e-mail, instant messaging, etc.). Finally, ties may vary in sign, ranging from positive (Joe likes Jane) to negative (Joe dislikes Jane).

Anmerkungen

To be found again here [5].

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Agrippina1

[3.] Nm/Fragment 093 17 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2012-04-30 01:12:08 Hindemith
Fragment, Gesichtet, Katz et al 2004, Nm, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 93, Zeilen: 17-25
Quelle: Katz et al 2004
Seite(n): 308, Zeilen: 23-31
In social network literature, researchers have examined a broad range of types of ties (Menzel, H. and Katz, E., 1957). These include communication ties (such as who talks to whom or who gives information or advice to whom), formal ties (such as who reports to whom), affective ties (such as who likes whom, or who trust whom), material or work flow ties (such as who gives bomb making material or other resources to whom), proximity ties (who is spatially or electronically close to whom). Networks are typically multiplex, that is, actors share more than one type of tie. Network researchers have examined a broad range of types of ties. These include communication ties (such as who talks to whom, or who gives information or advice to whom), formal ties (such as who reports to whom), affective ties (such as who likes whom, or who trusts whom), material or work flow ties (such as who gives money or other resources to whom), proximity ties (who is spatially or electronically close to whom), and cognitive ties (such as who knows who knows whom). Networks are typically mutiplex [sic], that is, actors share more than one type of tie.
Anmerkungen

The source of this section is found in the list of references but not here. Moreover nothing is marked as a citation.

Note: Page 19 and page 93 of the thesis are nearly identical, so Katz et al. (2004) has also been copied on page 19: Nm/Fragment_019_16

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), Bummelchen

[4.] Nm/Fragment 094 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2012-04-29 22:23:43 Hindemith
Fragment, Gesichtet, Katz et al 2004, Nm, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 94, Zeilen: 1-25
Quelle: Katz et al 2004
Seite(n): 308-309, Zeilen: p.308,31-33 - p.309,1-11.13-20
For example, two terrorists might have a formal tie (one is a footsoldier or a newly recruited person in a terrorist cell and reports to another, who is a cell leader) and an affective tie (they are friends); and may also have a proximity tie (i.e., they reside in the same building and their apartments are two doors away on the same floor).

Network researchers have distinguished between strong ties (such as family and friends) and weak ties such as acquaintances (Granovetter, M., 1973, 1982). This distinction will involve a multitude of facets, including affect, mutual obligations, reciprocity, and intensity. Strong ties are particularly valuable when an individual seeks socio-emotional support and often entail a high level of trust. Weak ties are more valuable when individuals are seeking diverse or unique information from someone outside their regular frequent contacts.

Ties may be non-directional (for example, Atta attends meeting with Nawaf Alhazmi) or vary in direction (for instance, Bin Laden gives advice to Atta vs. Atta gets advice from Bin Laden). They may vary in content (Atta talks with Khalid about the trust of his friends in using them as human bombs) and Khalid about his recent meeting with Bin Laden), frequency (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.), and medium (face-to-face conversation, written memos, email, fax, instant messages, etc.). Finally ties may vary in sign, ranging from positive (Iraqis like Zarqawi) to negative (Jordanians dislike Zarqawi).

[p. 308]

For example, two academic colleagues might have a formal tie (one is an assistant professor and reports to the other. who is the department chairperson)

[p.309]

and an affective tie (they are friends) and a proximity tie (their offices are two doors away).

Network researchers have distinguished between strong ties (such as family and friends) and weak ties (such as acquaintances) (Granovetter, 1973. 1982). This distinction can involve a multitude of facets, including affect, mutual obligations, reciprocity, and intensity. Strong ties are particularly valuable when an individual seeks socioemotional support and often entail a high level of trust. Weak ties are more valuable when individuals are seeking diverse or unique information from someone outside their regular frequent contacts. [...]

Ties may be nondirectional (Joe attends a meeting with Jane) or vary in direction (Joe gives advice to Jane vs. Joe gets advice from Jane). They may also vary in content (Joe talks to Jack about the weather and to Jane about sports), frequency (daily. weekly, monthly, etc.), and medium (face-to-face conversation, written memos, e-mail, instant messaging, etc.). Finally, ties may vary in sign, ranging from positive (Joe likes Jane) to negative (Joe dislikes Jane).

Anmerkungen

The same text, only the examples have been adapted to the subject at hand, terrorism. No reference given.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), Bummelchen

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki