ArticleChaos (Woodbury, N.Y.)2016
Detecting causality in policy diffusion processes.
Article in Chaos (Woodbury, N.Y.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying spike train synchrony and directionality: Measures and Applications.Biological cybernetics · 2026Review
- Formative reasons for state-to-state influences on firearm acquisition in the U.S.SSM - population health · 2024Article
- A spatiotemporal model of firearm ownership in the United States.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- A novel approach GRNTSTE to reconstruct gene regulatory interactions applied to a case study for rat pineal rhythm gene.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Revealing the structure of information flows discriminates similar animal social behaviors.eLife · 2020Article
- Detecting intermittent switching leadership in coupled dynamical systems.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Interactional dynamics of same-sex marriage legislation in the United States.Royal Society open science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A universal question in network science entails learning about the topology of interaction from collective dynamics. Here, we address this question by examining diffusion of laws across US states. We propose two complementary techniques to unravel determinants of this diffusion process: information-theoretic union transfer entropy and event synchronization. In order to systematically investigate their performance on law activity data, we establish a new stochastic model to generate synthetic law activity data based on plausible networks of interactions. Through extensive parametric studies, we demonstrate the ability of these methods to reconstruct networks, varying in size, link density, and degree heterogeneity. Our results suggest that union transfer entropy should be preferred for slowly varying processes, which may be associated with policies attending to specific local problems that occur only rarely or with policies facing high levels of opposition. In contrast, event synchronization is effective for faster enactment rates, which may be related to policies involving Federal mandates or incentives. This study puts forward a data-driven toolbox to explain the determinants of legal activity applicable to political science, across dynamical systems, information theory, and complex networks.
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.