Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21479173›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Strength of social tie predicts cooperative investment in a human social network.

Freya Harrison, James Sciberras, Richard James

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
15.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interactions between neural representations of the social and spatial environment.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  2. A mechanistic model of gossip, reputations, and cooperation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Social discounting involves modulation of neural value signals by temporoparietal junction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Imaging social motivation: distinct brain mechanisms drive effort production during collaboration versus competition.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2013
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Is self-sacrificial competitive altruism primarily a male activity?Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2012
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Freya HarrisonDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. freya.andersdottir@gmail.com
James Sciberras
Richard James
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social networks--diagrams which reflect the social structure of animal groups--are increasingly viewed as useful tools in behavioural ecology and evolutionary biology. Network structure may be especially relevant to the study of cooperation, because the action of mechanisms which affect the cost:benefit ratio of cooperating (e.g. reciprocity, punishment, image scoring) is likely to be mediated by the relative position of actor and recipient in the network. Social proximity could thus affect cooperation in a similar manner to biological relatedness. To test this hypothesis, we recruited members of a real-world social group and used a questionnaire to reveal their network. Participants were asked to endure physical discomfort in order to earn money for themselves and other group members, allowing us to explore relationships between willingness to suffer a cost on another's behalf and the relative social position of donor and recipient. Cost endured was positively correlated with the strength of the social tie between donor and recipient. Further, donors suffered greater costs when a relationship was reciprocated. Interestingly, participants regularly suffered greater discomfort for very close peers than for themselves. Our results provide new insight into the effect of social structure on the direct benefits of cooperation.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorSocial SupportFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID21479173
PMCPMC3068164
OpenAlexW2004667738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.