ArticleScience advances2020
Cumulative effects of triadic closure and homophily in social networks.
Article in Science advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 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
- Neighborhood Shocks and Network Dynamics: An Instrumental Variable Approach to Measuring Triadic Closure in Daily Mobility Networks.Social networks · 2026Article
- The pivotal role of the food service industry in alleviating urban segregation and boosting city vitality.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Modeling and Dynamic Analysis of Trust Decay in Social Media Based on Triadic Closure Structure.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Temporal rich-club phenomenon and its formation mechanisms in international trade: Evidence from new energy minerals.iScience · 2026Article
- Network inequality through preferential attachment, triadic closure, and homophily.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Homophily within and across groups.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Intersectional inequalities in social ties.Science advances · 2025Article
- Ingroup preferences, segregation, and intergroup contact in neighborhoods and civic organizations.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Few shot learning for phenotype-driven diagnosis of patients with rare genetic diseases.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Homophily and social influence as mechanisms of loneliness clustering in social networks.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Self-views converge during enjoyable conversations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Commodity-specific triads in the Dutch inter-industry production network.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Homophily and social mixing in a small community: Implications for infectious disease transmission.PloS one · 2024Article
- Evolutionary Digital Twin-Oriented Complex Networked Systems driven by node features and the mutation of feature preferences.PloS one · 2024Article
- Towards Digital Twin-Oriented Complex Networked Systems: Introducing heterogeneous node features and interaction rules.PloS one · 2024Article
- Financial conflicts of interest of physicians followed by oncology journals on Twitter.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- The rhythms of transient relationships: allocating time between weekdays and weekends.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Multidimensional attributes expose Heider balance dynamics to measurements.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Universal patterns in egocentric communication networks.Nature communications · 2023Article
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 structure has often been attributed to two network evolution mechanisms-triadic closure and choice homophily-which are commonly considered independently or with static models. However, empirical studies suggest that their dynamic interplay generates the observed homophily of real-world social networks. By combining these mechanisms in a dynamic model, we confirm the longheld hypothesis that choice homophily and triadic closure cause induced homophily. We estimate how much observed homophily in friendship and communication networks is amplified due to triadic closure. We find that cumulative effects of homophily amplification can also lead to the widely documented core-periphery structure of networks, and to memory of homophilic constraints (equivalent to hysteresis in physics). The model shows that even small individual bias may prompt network-level changes such as segregation or core group dominance. Our results highlight that individual-level mechanisms should not be analyzed separately without considering the dynamics of society as a whole.
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.