ArticlePsychological methods2019
Assessing the robustness of cluster solutions obtained from sparse count matrices.
Article in Psychological methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing Resting-State Frontoparietal-Amygdala Network Connectivity as a Potential Moderator of the Developmental Link Between Executive Functioning and Internalizing Symptoms: A Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation-Based Approach.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
- Group, Subgroup and Person-Specific Longitudinal Associations Between Physical Activity and Affect in Individuals With and Without Depressive and Anxiety Disorders.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2026Article
- Article
- Heterogeneity in suicide risk: Evidence from personalized dynamic models.Behaviour research and therapy · 2024Article
- Data-driven connectivity profiles relate to smoking cessation outcomes.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Clinical subtyping using community detection: Limited utility?International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2023Article
- Generalisable long COVID subtypes: findings from the NIH N3C and RECOVER programmes.EBioMedicine · 2023Article
- Characterizing heterogeneity in early adolescent reward networks and individualized associations with behavioral and clinical outcomes.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Fifty years of structural equation modeling: A history of generalization, unification, and diffusion.Social science research · 2022Article
- Generalizable Long COVID Subtypes: Findings from the NIH N3C and RECOVER Programs.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2022Article
- Integrating a functional view on suicide risk into idiographic statistical models.Behaviour research and therapy · 2022Article
- A Guide for Choosing Community Detection Algorithms in Social Network Studies: The Question Alignment Approach.American journal of preventive medicine · 2020Article
- Dynamics among borderline personality and anxiety features in psychotherapy outpatients: An exploration of nomothetic and idiographic patterns.Personality disorders · 2020Article
- Parsing Heterogeneity in Autism Spectrum Disorder and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder with Individual Connectome Mapping.Brain connectivity · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Psychological researchers often seek to obtain cluster solutions from sparse count matrices (e.g., social networks; counts of symptoms that are in common for 2 given individuals; structural brain imaging). Increasingly, community detection methods are being used to subset the data in a data-driven manner. While many of these approaches perform well in simulation studies and thus offer some improvement upon traditional clustering approaches, there is no readily available approach for evaluating the robustness of these solutions in empirical data. Researchers have no way of knowing if their results are due to noise. We describe here 2 approaches novel to the field of psychology that enable evaluation of cluster solution robustness. This tutorial also explains the use of an associated R package, perturbR, which provides researchers with the ability to use the methods described herein. In the first approach, the cluster assignment from the original matrix is compared against cluster assignments obtained by randomly perturbing the edges in the matrix. Stable cluster solutions should not demonstrate large changes in the presence of small perturbations. For the second approach, Monte Carlo simulations of random matrices that have the same properties as the original matrix are generated. The distribution of quality scores ("modularity") obtained from the cluster solutions from these matrices are then compared with the score obtained from the original matrix results. From this, one can assess if the results are better than what would be expected by chance. perturbR automates these 2 methods, providing an easy-to-use resource for psychological researchers. We demonstrate the utility of this package using benchmark simulated data generated from a previous study and then apply the methods to publicly available empirical data obtained from social networks and structural neuroimaging. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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.