ArticleRoyal Society open science2016
The structure and evolution of story networks.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Classifying evolutionary forces in language change using neural networks.Evolutionary human sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With this study, we advance the understanding about the processes through which stories are retold. A collection of story retellings can be considered as a network of stories, in which links between stories represent pre-textual (or ancestral) relationships. This study provides a mechanistic understanding of the structure and evolution of such story networks: we construct a story network for a large diachronic collection of Dutch literary retellings of Red Riding Hood, and compare this network to one derived from a corpus of paper chain letters. In the analysis, we first provide empirical evidence that the formation of these story networks is subject to age-dependent selection processes with a strong lopsidedness towards shorter time-spans between stories and their pre-texts (i.e. 'young' story versions are preferred in producing new versions). Subsequently, we systematically compare these findings with and among predictions of various formal models of network growth to determine more precisely which kinds of attractiveness are also at play or might even be preferred as explicatory models. By carefully studying the structure and evolution of the two story networks, then, we show that existing stories are differentially preferred to function as a new version's pre-text given three types of attractiveness: (i) frequency-based and (ii) model-based attractiveness which (iii) decays in time.
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.