Comparison of Network Comparison of Network Characteristics of Foreign & Characteristics of Foreign & Native Academic Scientist in Native Academic Scientist in STEM fieldsSTEM fields

Kamna LalWan-Ling HuangEric W. Welch

Prepared for presentation at ST&E Policy Lab SymposiumPrepared for presentation at ST&E Policy Lab SymposiumMarch 17-18March 17-18thth 2009, CUPPA-UIC, Chicago 2009, CUPPA-UIC, Chicago

Research questionsResearch questions

Do native scientist and foreign born scientists differ in their network structure and characteristics of network relationship?

Do scientist of different nationality vary in their network structure and characteristics of network relationship?

Individual Factors

Native vs. Foreign Countries of Origin

Differences in Networks

Network Structure *Total collaborative size *Talk network size *Advice network size *Extent of external collaborations *Collaborative network density *Advice network density *Talk network density Characteristics of Network Relationships *Closeness *Extent of collaboration with seniors *Peer ties

FrameworkFramework

Theoretical JustificationTheoretical Justification

Culture-Value Framework (Hofstede, 1980)

culture differential can explain workplace culture differential can explain workplace behaviors, attitudes and other behaviors, attitudes and other organizational outcomesorganizational outcomes

Proposition: Foreign born and native scientist develop their network structure and network relationships differently due to culture differences

Hypotheses (1)Hypotheses (1) Collaborative/advice/talk network

sizeH1: The native scientists have a larger network than the foreign

born scientists (Melin, 2004; DiTomaso; Ibarra, 1995; Farris, & Cordero, 1993 )

Extent of external collaborationH2: There is a difference between native scientists and foreign

born scientists in the propensity for external collaboration

(Krackhardt & Stern,1988; Lee, 2004; Bozeman & Corley, 2004)

Hypotheses (2)Hypotheses (2)

Density of collaborative/advice/talk network

H3: Foreign born scientists have a denser network than native scientists.

(Burt, 1992, 2004; Tanyildiz, 2008 )

ClosenessH4: The closeness ties are more and frequent in case of foreign

nationals.(Alder, 1997; Trompenaars, 1998)

Hypotheses (3)Hypotheses (3) Extent of collaboration with seniorH5: Foreign born scientists have larger proportion of senior

collaborators in their network (Fox & Faver, 1984 )

Peer TieH6: Foreign born scientists have smaller proportion of peer

collaborators in their network (Hafernik et al., 1997; Katz & Martin, 1997; Melin, 2000)

Country differentialH7: Foreign born scientists from countries with similar culture

and language as U.S. will have a similar network structure and relationship pattern as native scientists, vice versa (Carliner, 2000; Alder, 1997; Espenshade & Fu, 1997; Trompenaars, 1998 )

MeasuresMeasures Grouping Independent Variables (self reported)

Native Born v.s. Foreign Born Country Groups

1=U.S. and Canada; 2=China and Taiwan; 3=India; 4=Europe; 5=Eastern Europe; 6=All else

Dependent Variables Collaborative/advice/talk network size: Sum of names

generated Extent of external collaboration: E-I index = (ECL – ICL) /

(ECL + ICL). Density of network: 2 *(N of connected ties) / (N)(N-1). Closeness: Number of generated names perceived as close

friends by a respondent/ total number of names generated Extent of collaborating with senior: Senior and Junior Index =

(SCL – JCL) / (SCL + JCL) Peer tie

MethodMethod

Comparison of two group means- ANOVA

Post Hoc tests Tukey’s HSD-assumption of

homogeneity of variance held Games-Howell - homogeneity of

variance violated

N=1601

Results-Group ComparisonsResults-Group ComparisonsANOVAANOVA

Native and Foreign born scientist significantly differ in all dimensions of network structure and network relationship, except the extent of external collaboration (ns)

Native scientists have a higher mean value than foreign born scientists for most variables

Foreign born has higher mean value for E-I Index

Unexpected collaboration density result for foreign born

S-J Index values of foreign born higher than native born

Results-Country ComparisonsResults-Country ComparisonsANOVAANOVA

Scientists from countries with same culture have similar values for their network structure and characteristics of network relationship except the extent of external collaboration and density of talk network Mean value for U.S./Canada, Eastern Europe and

Europe similar for network size, collaboration density

India shows similarity with U.S/Canada in size of total collaborative network, advice & talk network

China has lowest values for peer ties, talk sum, talk density and collaboration density

Results-Results-Posthoc for nationalityPosthoc for nationality

U.S/Canada and European country groups appear to be similar in network structure and network relationship

China/Taiwan have smaller talk size than India and Europe

Language Explanation: India-post colonial country* Scientists from China/Taiwan and Eastern Europe

are more likely to collaborate with senior academics

Scientists from China/Taiwan are less likely to collaborate with peer colleagues than Europe and Eastern Europe

ConclusionConclusion

The results generally support our hypotheses

Native and Foreign born scientists differ in their network structure and characteristics of network relationship

Language is an important factor explaining network size and characteristics

Questions & Comments