ArticleScientific reports2019
Considering appropriate replication in the design of animal social network studies.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Social network dynamics under experimental manipulations of predation risk and food abundance in wild rock hyraxes.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Pooled it
- Population age structure shapes selection on social behaviour in a long-lived insect.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Familiarity, age, weaning and health status impact social proximity networks in dairy calves.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Group composition of individual personalities alters social network structure in experimental populations of forked fungus beetles.Biology letters · 2022Article
- Understanding Allogrooming Through a Dynamic Social Network Approach: An Example in a Group of Dairy Cows.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social network analysis has increasingly been considered a useful tool to interpret the complexity of animal social relationships. However, group composition can affect the contact structure of the network resulting in variation between networks. Replication in contact network studies is rarely done but enables determination of possible variation in response across networks. Here we explore the importance of between-group variability in social behaviour and the impact of replication on hypothesis testing. We use an exemplar study of social contact data collected from six replicated networks of cattle before and after the application of a social disturbance treatment. In this replicated study, subtle but consistent changes in animal contact patterns were detected after the application of a social disturbance treatment. We then quantify both within- and between-group variation in this study and explore the importance of varying the number of replicates and the number of individuals within each network, on the precision of the differences in treatment effects for the contact behaviour of the resident cattle. The analysis demonstrates that reducing the number of networks observed in the study would reduce the probability of detecting treatment differences for social behaviours even if the total number of animals was kept the same.
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.