Theory and Hypotheses Clause Samples

Theory and Hypotheses. The theoretical framework for this study builds on past work connecting public opinion and behavior to elite cue taking (Zaller, 1992), as well as literature on ideological polarization between party identifiers more broadly. Extensive scholarship points to political parties becoming increasingly divided and ideology more closely aligning with partisanship (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2008). Since 1972, there has been a substantial increase in the correlation between political party and ideological identification, and the gap between party identifiers nearly doubled between 1972 and 2004 (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2008). The result of this has been a marked increase in polarization on a wide range of issues from views on abortion to jobs and living standards (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2008). Americans’ party and ideological identifications are now largely predictive of views on science, trust in the media, and the proper size of government. On science-related issues, Republicans and conservatives are less likely to believe in evolution and tend to be more skeptical about the existence and consequences of global climate change compared to Democrats and liberals (Pew Research Center, 2014-15). This is consistent with recent research indicating that Republicans perceive less personal vulnerability to the virus and the virus’s severity as lower. Republicans also have higher levels of distrust in the media, the majority of which rely on Fox News whose viewers have indicated less accurate knowledge about COVID-19 such as believing the virus was made in a lab (Pew Research Center, 2020). An overwhelming majority of Republicans say they prefer a smaller government providing fewer services while a nearly identical share of Democrats prefer the opposite (Pew Research Center, 2020). Overall, Democrats are less skeptical of science, more trusting across a wide range of news sources, and more accepting of government intervention. These three patterns help contextualize the partisan divide in COVID-19 risk perception and compliance with public health recommendations. Scholarship suggests that elite issue framing teaches and reinforces these attitudes, steering citizens toward specific policy judgements (▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1991; ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇). In fact, party identification puts pressure on partisans to hold views that conform to elite messaging and in- group members (▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2019). Using news outlets and social media, Americans can gauge positions of political elites and orient themselves to align w...

Theory and Hypotheses. Performance assistance Boomerangs and true newcomers as mobile workers Integrating newcomers into work groups Performance assistance from boomerangs to incumbents

Theory and Hypotheses. My core argument is that while labor-friendly district-level characteristics can on their own be influential with regards to the level of pro-labor legislative behavior, union political strategies are the main mechanisms for inducing greater political representation. Specifically, unions rely on three key strategies to utilize their membership base and resources to directly sway legislator behavior. This is reflected in Figure 1: District-level characteristics: - Ability to organize - Union membership & numbers - Union concentration - Union resources - Information exchange - Voter mobilization - Resource mobilization Representative (MC) behavior - Sponsorship - Original co- sponsorship - Co-sponsorship - Roll-call votes I begin by reviewing the dependent variable (representative MC behavior), independent variables (district-level characteristics), then mechanisms (union strategies). A principal-agent problem in political science and economics literature is generally defined by the relationship between a principal and an agent – the principal relies on the actions or decisions made by the agent, which possess authority and often has incentives to act in its own interest. In this situation, “the election process itself sets up a principal-agent relationship” with the “principal” actors as the union member constituents and the “agents” as legislator MCs (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 1989, 696). The literature identifies two main factors that prevent the agent-legislator from accurately representing their constituents’ interests, causing principal-agent problems: legislators can break their promises after elections and voters have “little incentive to monitor the performance of legislators – to see whether promises made are actually kept” (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 1989, 670). The natural first step in determining the extent to which agents are successfully representing their constituents’ interests is examining their behavior. In this section, I review potential agent-legislator behavior to justify the construction of the dependent variable measure – amount of behavior in the interests of labor unions. A fair amount of the literature on representation relies on roll call votes for measure of MC behavior. However, to gauge the complete picture of all representative MC behavior, roll- call votes may simply not be enough. In operationalizing representative behavior in the principal- agent relationship, previous literature argues that the political institutions within legis...

Theory and Hypotheses. In this section, I develop testable hypotheses around the contingencies of business model complexity for new venture survival. I organize these hypotheses in the theoretical framework shown in Figure 2. I elaborate on this framework and associated hypotheses below.

Theory and Hypotheses. Interdependence is a state of being in which a person’s behavior is determined, influenced, or controlled by some other person or persons (▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇, 1999). Task or functional interdependence stems from the division of labor (Simon, 1947) and is connected with the groups’ goal and tasks. That is, members are interdependent to complete their group task. However, there are additional bases for interdependence among group members which are more informal and social by nature that need to be considered to obtain a clear picture of coordination (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1997; ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1990; ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1997). Therefore, we additionally distinguish cognitive interdependence and affect-based interdependence. Both interdependence types reflect the informal and social process more than the formal task interdependency does (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1990). Group members not only experience some division of labor, but it is also highly likely that group members (to a more or lesser extent) share a common perspective about their group (Lindenberg, 1997). Cognitive interdependence refers in this paper to the sharing of values or mental models among individuals with respect to the group of which they are members (▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇, 2001; ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1999). Affect-based interdependence refers in this study to the exchange of feelings of social well-being and social acceptance often exhibited in friendship relationships (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & Leary, 1995). Being a member of a team with high levels of functional, cognitive, and affect-based interdependence implies that you are performing your task well because your team members perform well and you are dependent on their efforts. It also implies that you and your group members have similar values regarding the group and group work. In addition, you would be a happy person because you are surrounded by people who give you a feeling of social acceptance and well-being.

Theory and Hypotheses. Based on DeSanctis, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇ (1999), interdependence is defined as a state of being in which a person is determined, influenced, or controlled by some other person. Since interdependencies are carried through interpersonal relationships, they are relational by nature, which is why we choose to use a network theory approach to study the influence of the interdependency types on performance. Using a network approach offers us the possibility to integratively study both the formal interdependence relationships (i.e., task interdependence) and the informal interdependence relationships (i.e., cognitive and affect-based interdependence). The latter are said to possibly be the key mechanisms for coordinating complex business processes (▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇, 1999), but are quite understudied compared to task interdependence. The different interdependence types are conceptualized as different networks, and those networks can be seen as coordination mechanisms, meaning that those network structures serve as an instrument for managing different interdependencies (e.g., ▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇; ▇▇▇▇, 1997; ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1986). First, we present the reasoning per interdependence type, the so-called main effects. Second, we present our congruence model of interdependence.