Examining the effect of the individual characteristics of implementers and the interaction of multiple relationships on the structure of psychosocial intervention teams

Table 1 Cohesion parameters of the six networks evaluated

Type of relationship	Network cohesion measures
Type of relationship	Density	Ind. Cent.	Out. Cent.	Mean degree	Trans.	Number of clusters and model adjustment	Homophily (professional category)	Homophily (based on seniority)
Recognition	51.17%	28.6%	49.8%	25.55	36.64%	7 (R² = .197)	.240	− .141
Preference to work	7.3%	18.1%	24.4%	3.51	7.11%	10 (R² = .132)	.163	− .132
Information request (submitted)	8.5%	23.2%	23.2%	4.08	7.04%	16 (R² = .199)	− .091	− .154
Information request (received)	7.14%	11.84%	26.73%	12.41	6.09%	6 (R² = .074)	− .056	− .116
User referrals (submitted)	1.74%	6.72%	19.48%	3.31	9.57%	7^c (R² = .138)	.171	− .024
User referrals (received)	1.45%	7.03%	13.41%	2.81	5.47%	8 (R² = .182)	.176	− .031

Ind. Cent. indegree centralization, Out. Cent. outdegree centralization, Trans. transitivity

ISSN: 1748-5908