Editing Social capital (section)

=== Social ties ===
[[Carlos García Timón]] describes that the structural dimensions of social capital relate to an individual ability to make weak and strong ties to others within a system. This dimension focuses on the advantages derived from the configuration of an actor's, either individual or collective, network.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} The differences between ''weak'' and ''strong'' ties are explained by Granovetter (1973).<ref name="Granovetter 1973">{{cite journal|last1=Granovetter|first1=M. S.|year=1973|title=The Strength of Weak Ties|journal=American Journal of Sociology|volume=78|issue=6|pages=1360–1380|doi=10.1086/225469|s2cid=59578641}}</ref> Bridging social capital refers to the weak ties that individuals with heterogeneous limited interactions form. Bridging social capital is more likely to provide valuable new information (Moshkovitz and Hayat, 2021). Some others describes the weak and strong ties relationship as bonding and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital refers to strong ties: the intimate relationships people feel close to and trust. The relational dimension focuses on the character of the connection between individuals. This is best characterized through trust of others and their cooperation and the identification an individual has within a network.<ref> Yao et al (2022) Carbon neutrality vs. neutralité carbone: A comparative study on French and English users’ perceptions and social capital on Twitter, Frontiers in Environmental Sciences 10:969039, doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.969039</ref> Hazleton and Kennan (2000)<ref>Hazleton V., and W. Kennan. 2000. "Social capital: reconceptualizing the bottom line." ''Corporate Communications: An International Journal'' 5(2):81–86.</ref> added a third angle, that of communication. Communication is needed to access and use social capital through exchanging information, identifying problems and solutions, and managing conflict.

According to [[Max Boisot|Boisot]] (1995),<ref>[[Max Boisot|Boisot, Max.]] 1995. ''Information Space: A framework for learning in organizations, institutions and culture''. London, Routledge</ref> and Boland & Tenkasi (1995),<ref>Boland and Tenkasi (1995)</ref> meaningful communication requires at least some sharing context between the parties to such exchange. The cognitive dimension focuses on the shared meaning, representations and interpretations that individuals or groups have with one another.<ref name="Nahapiet 1998">{{cite journal|last1=Nahapiet|first1=J.|last2=Ghoshal|first2=S.|year=1998|title=Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage|journal=Academy of Management Review|volume=23|issue=2|pages=242–266|citeseerx=10.1.1.598.8940|doi=10.5465/amr.1998.533225|jstor=259373|s2cid=44308473 }}</ref>