Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

Three hypotheses about the effects of different informal social network structures on gossip behavior are developed and tested. Gossip is defined as a conversation about a third person who is not participating in the conversation. Having analyzed the costs and benefits of gossip, we prefer the coalition hypothesis.~It states that gossip will flourish in social networks that have a relatively large number of coalition triads, that is ego and alter having a good relationship amongst themselves and both having a bad relationship with tertius, the object of gossip. Two rivalling hypotheses are developed. The constraint hypothesis predicts that the inclination towards gossip is greater, the larger the number of structural holes in the personal network of the gossipmonger.~The closure hypothesis predicts that more gossip will be found in networks with a large number of closed triads, that is where both gossipmonger and listener have a good relationship with the absent third person. The hypotheses are tested using a newly developed instrument to measure gossip behavior and network data from six work organizations and six school classes. The data support the coalition hypothesis and do not support the two rivalling hypotheses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arno, A. (1980), “Fijan Gossip as Adjudication: A Communication Model of Informal Social Control,” Journal of Anthropological Research, 36(3), 343-360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, J. and M. Jones (1996), “The Poison Grapevine: How Destructive are Gossip and Rumor in the Workplace?,” Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7(1), 75-86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, J. (1987), Discreet Indiscretions: The Social Organization of Gossip. New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (1992), Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. and M. Knez (1996), “Trust and Third-Party Gossip,” in R. Kramer and T. Tyler (Eds.) Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 68-89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplow, T. (1946), “Rumors in War,” Social Forces, 25, 298-302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1953), “Management Communication and the Grapevine,” Harvard Business Review, 31, 43-49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, R. (1997), Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language.New York: Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eder, D. and J.L. Enke (1991), “The Structure of Gossip: Opportunities and Constraints on Collective Expression Among Adolescents,” American Sociological Review, 56, 494-508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elias, N. and L. Scotson (1985), The Established and the Outsiders.London: Cass, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, G. and R. Rosnow (1978), “Gossip, Gossipers, Gossiping,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(1), 161-168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedkin, N. (1983), “Horizons of Observability and Limits of Informal Social Control in Organizations,” Social Forces, 62(1), 54-77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. (1994), “Godfather's Gossip,” Archives Europeennes de Sociologie, 35(2), 199-223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmore, D. (1978), “Varieties of Gossip in a Spanish Rural Community,” Ethnology, 17(1), 89-99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gluckman, M. (1963), “Gossip and Scandal,” Current Anthropology, 4, 307-314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gluckman, M. (1968), “Psychological, Sociological and Anthropological Explanations of Witchcraft and Gossip: A Clarification,” Man, 3, 20-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, G. (1993), Organizational Communication. Madison: WCB Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelman, D. (1973), “Gossip in Encounters: The Transmission of Information in a Bounded Social Setting,” Man, 8(2), 210-227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellweg, S. (1987), “Organizational Grapevines,” in B. Dervin and M. Voigt (Eds.) Progress in Communication Sciences 8, Norwood: Ablex, pp. 213-230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, R. (1993), “Group Standards and the Organization of Work: The Effort Bargain Reconsidered,” Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 11, 55-80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. (1993), “Power Among Peers: Partners' Strategic Culture in a Northeastern U.S. Law Firm,” Manuscript.

  • Lazega, E. (1995), “Protecting the Common Good Among Equals: A Lateral Control Regime of Partners in a Law Firm,” Manuscript.

  • Lazega, E. and S. Vari (1992), “Acteurs, Cibles et Leviers: Analyse Factorielle des Relations de Controle Indirect Dans une Firme Americaine d'avocats d'affairs,” Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique, 37, 41-51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazega, E. and M.-O. Lebeaux (1995), “Capital Social et Contrainte Latérale,” Revue Francaise de Sociologie, 36, 759-777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leaper, C. and H. Holliday (1995), “Gossip in Same-Gender and Cross-Gender Friends Conversations,” Personal Relationships, 2(3), 237-246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. and A. Arluke (1985), “An Explanatory Analysis of Sex Differences in Gossip,” Sex Roles, 12(3/4), 281-286.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. and G. Sevón (1988), “Gossip, Information, and Decision-Making,” in J. March (Ed.) Decisions and Organizations, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 429-442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merry, S. (1984), “Rethinking Gossip and Scandal,” in D. Black (Ed.) Toward a General Theory of Social Control. Vol 1: Fundamentals, Orlando: Academic Press, pp. 271-302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrill, C. (1995), The Executive Way: Conflict Management in Corporations.Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo, O., B. Nevo and A. Derch-Zehavi (1993), “The Development of the Tendency to Gossip Questionnaire: Construct and Current Validation for a Sample of Israeli College Students,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 973-981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noon, M. and R. Delbridge (1993), “News from Behind My Hand: Gossip in Organizations,” Organization Studies, 14(1), 23-36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. (1967), “What is Gossip About? An Alternative Hypothesis,” Man, 2, 278-285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. (1968), “Gossip and Transaction,” Man, 3, 305-308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. (1970), “Informal Communication and Information Management,” Canadian Revue of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 7, 172-188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, S. (1991), “Modes of Persuasion: Gossip, Song, and Divination in Tuareg Conflict Resolution,” Anthropological Quarterly, 64(1), 30-46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roethlisberger, F. and W.J. Dickson (1939, 1992), Management and the Worker.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1984), Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research.Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrader, S. (1995), “Gaining Advantage by “Leaking” Information: Informal Information Trading,” European Management Journal, 13(2), 156-163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. (1997), “De populaties van de meta-analyse,” Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 22(1), 3-15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soeters, J. (1994), “Roddel in Organisaties,” Sociologische Gids, 41(5), 329-345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, H. and L. Porter (1968), “A Study of the Grapevine in a Governmental Organization,” Personell Psychology, 21, 223-230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. and S. Schrader (1996), “‘Managed’ Informal Information Trading: The Oil Scout System in Oil Exploration Firms,” International Journal of Technology Management, 11(1/2), 207-218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaremba, A. (1988), “Working with the Organizational Grapevine,” Personell Journal, July, 38-43.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wittek, R., Wielers, R. Gossip in Organizations. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 4, 189–204 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009636325582

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009636325582

Navigation