ArticleThe British journal of sociology2026
From Boardrooms to Platforms: Elite Brokerage and Digital Influence in Chilean Pro-Market Think Tanks.
Article in The British journal of sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article examines how Chilean pro-market think tanks-the Centro de Estudios Públicos (CEP) and the Fundación para el Progreso (FPP)-operate as performative brokers, translating elite network positions into epistemic authority across hybrid media environments. Through a mixed-methods analysis combining social network analysis of interlocking directorates with statistical modelling of over 6000 media items (2012-2024), we develop the concept of performative brokerage: the enactment of public expertise through platform-specific repertoires. Our findings reveal two distinct brokerage modalities. CEP exemplifies technocratic-distributed brokerage, leveraging extensive corporate-academic interlocks and high interfield capacity to sustain authority through traditional media gatekeeping. In contrast, FPP employs compensatory brokerage, offsetting limited corporate embeddedness through algorithmic visibility and moral-ideological repertoires tailored to digital platforms. Methodologically, we introduce an interfield capacity index extending Burt's brokerage measures, and employ robust modelling strategies-Negative Binomial regressions, Spearman correlations, and zero-inflation correction-to analyse platform-specific engagement across Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube. Results show that while CEP dominates citation-based authority, FPP achieves reach through platform efficiency rather than emotional escalation. By integrating Burt's structural holes, Bourdieusian capital conversion, and the sociology of economisation and performativity, we advance performative brokerage as a framework that explains how think tanks translate network advantages into public authority through platform-specific credibility performances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.