DennisA. R.LakhiwalA.SachdevaA. (2023). AI agents as team members: Effects on satisfaction, conflict, trustworthiness, and willingness to work with. Journal of Management Information Systems, 40(2), 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2023.2196773
2.
DoerfelM. L.KimM.KwestelM.YoonH.QuowJ. (2022). Resilience organizing: A multilevel communication framework. Journal of Communication, 72(6), 605–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqac027
3.
DongC.RimH. (2019). Exploring nonprofit-business partnerships on Twitter from a network perspective. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.11.001
4.
GolobU.TurkelS.KroneggerL.UzunogluE. (2018). Uncovering CSR meaning networks: A cross-national comparison of Turkey and Slovenia. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.05.003
5.
JiaR.LiW. (2020). Public diplomacy networks: China’s public diplomacy communication practices in twitter during Two Sessions. Public Relations Review, 46(1), 101818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101818
6.
KentM. L.SommerfeldtE. J.SafferA. J. (2016).Social networks, power, and public relations: Tertius Iungens as a cocreational approach to studying relationship networks. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.08.002
7.
LiX. L.FengJ. (2021). Empowerment or disempowerment: Exploring stakeholder engagement in nation branding through a mixed method approach to social network analysis. Public Relations Review, 47(3), 102024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102024
8.
MaddenS.HaughtM. J.JamesA. (2021). Key issue operatives in an issue-driven network: Public relations as a “pocket of strength” in campus sexual assault awareness and prevention. Public Relations Review, 47(5), 102114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102114
9.
MongeP. R.ContractorN. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. Oxford University Press.
10.
MorehouseJ.SafferA. J. (2023). Putting stakeholders’ engagement in the equation: Proposing the integrated network engagement model. Public Relations Review, 49(1), 102291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102291
11.
RimH.LeeY.YooS. (2020). Polarized public opinion responding to corporate social advocacy: Social network analysis of boycotters and advocators. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101869
12.
SchultzF.KleinnijenhuisJ.OegemaD.UtzS.Van AtteveldtW. (2012).Strategic framing in the BP crisis: A semantic network analysis of associative frames. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.003
13.
ShumateM.ContractorN. (2013). Emergence of multidimensional social networks. In PutnamL. L.MumbyD. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational communication (pp. 449–474). Sage.
14.
ShumateM.PilnyA.AtoubaY. C.KimJ.Peña-y-LilloM.CooperK. R.SahagunA.YangS. (2013). A taxonomy of communication networks. In CohenE. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 37 (pp. 95–123). Routledge.
15.
SmithB. G.SmithS. B.KnightonD. (2018). Social media dialogues in a crisis: A mixed-methods approach to identifying publics on social media. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 562–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.005
16.
TaylorM.DoerfelM. L. (2005). Another dimension to explicating relationships: Measuring inter-organizational linkages. Public Relations Review, 31(1), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2004.11.013
17.
UysalN.YangA. (2013). The power of activist networks in the mass self-communication era: A triangulation study of the impact of WikiLeaks on the stock value of Bank of America. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.09.007
18.
van DijkJ. A. (2005, May). Outline of a multilevel approach of the network society [Conference session]. 55th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, New York, NY, United States.
19.
WangP.RobinsG.PattisonP.LazegaE. (2013). Exponential random graph models for multilevel networks. Social Networks, 35(1), 96–115.
20.
WuD. (2016). Assessing resource transactions in partnership networks: US 100,000 Strong network of public diplomacy. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 120–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.001
21.
WuD.YangA. (2017). China’s public diplomatic networks on the Ebola issue in West Africa: Issues management in a network society. Public Relations Review, 43(2), 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.02.013
22.
YangA. (2020). The issue niche theory of nongovernmental and nonprofit organizations’ interorganizational network ecology. Communication Theory, 30(1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz014
23.
YangA.JiY. G. (2019). The quest for legitimacy and the communication of strategic cross-sectoral partnership on Facebook: A big data study. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 101839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101839
24.
YangA.SafferA. J. (2019). Embracing a network perspective in the network society: The dawn of a new paradigm in strategic public relations. Public Relations Review, 45(4), 101843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.101843
25.
YangA.TaylorM. (2015). Looking over, looking out, and moving forward: Positioning public relations in theorizing organizational network ecologies. Communication Theory, 25, 91–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12049
26.
YangA.TaylorM. (2021). From organizational-centric engagement to network-centric engagement: The role of autonomous public communities in a mediated public policy advocacy network. Social Media+ Society, 7(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211038262
27.
ZhouA. (2019). Bring publics back into networked public relations research: A dual-projection approach for network ecology. Public Relations Review, 45(4), 101772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.03.004