ArticlePloS one2019
Exploring the links between dispositions, romantic relationships, support networks and community inclusion in men and women.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lonelier people feel less empathic despite intact neural empathy responses after meditation training.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2026Trial
- Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test Scores Demonstrate Poor Structural Properties in Nine Large Non-Clinical Samples.Assessment · 2026Article
- Why friendship and loneliness affect our health.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Social isolation and the brain in the pandemic era.Nature human behaviour · 2022Review
- Laughter influences social bonding but not prosocial generosity to friends and strangers.PloS one · 2021Article
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
Most studies of social cognition have focused on dyadic relationships, and rather few have looked at how we engage with individuals in the wider social world into which we are embedded. Here we use principle component analysis (PCA) and path analysis to explore how different aspects of human sociality interact. We demonstrate two distinct clusters in both sexes relating to (i) romantic relationships and (ii) wider social engagement, such as that with the local community. These two domains of relationship were associated with different dispositional traits: individual variation in impulsivity in the former, and in empathy and avoidant attachment in the latter. Although these clusters were broadly similar across both sexes, clearer differentiation is evident in males. In females only, support network size was positively related to the anxious dimension of attachment and, unlike in males, was not related to feelings of inclusion in the local community. This suggests that support networks may play different roles in the two sexes, indicating a productive line of future research. These findings have important practical applications: loneliness interventions that target the specific type of relationship that is felt to be lacking and the associated dispositional traits are likely to be more effective than more generic approaches.
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.