Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32953051›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2020

How to make methodological decisions when inferring social networks.

André C Ferreira, Rita Covas, Liliana R Silva, Sandra C Esteves, Inês F Duarte, Rita Fortuna, Franck Theron, Claire Doutrelant, Damien R Farine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Non-breeding social behaviour as an investment in reducing future territoriality costs.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Interplay of cooperative breeding and predation risk on egg allocation and reproductive output.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
  15. Opposite-sex associations are linked with annual fitness, but sociality is stable over lifetime.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

André C FerreiraCentre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive Univ Montpellier CNRS EPHE, IRD Univ Paul-Valery Montpellier 3 Montpellier France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0454-1053
Rita CovasCIBIO-InBio Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources Vairão Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7130-144X
Liliana R SilvaCIBIO-InBio Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources Vairão Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4475-8035
Sandra C EstevesCIBIO-InBio Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources Vairão Portugal.
Inês F DuarteCIBIO-InBio Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources Vairão Portugal.
Rita FortunaCIBIO-InBio Research Centre in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources Vairão Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6049-3690
Franck TheronCentre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive Univ Montpellier CNRS EPHE, IRD Univ Paul-Valery Montpellier 3 Montpellier France.
Claire DoutrelantCentre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive Univ Montpellier CNRS EPHE, IRD Univ Paul-Valery Montpellier 3 Montpellier France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1893-3960
Damien R FarineDepartment of Collective Behavior Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior Konstanz Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2208-7613

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social network analyses allow studying the processes underlying the associations between individuals and the consequences of those associations. Constructing and analyzing social networks can be challenging, especially when designing new studies as researchers are confronted with decisions about how to collect data and construct networks, and the answers are not always straightforward. The current lack of guidance on building a social network for a new study system might lead researchers to try several different methods and risk generating false results arising from multiple hypotheses testing. Here, we suggest an approach for making decisions when starting social network research in a new study system that avoids the pitfall of multiple hypotheses testing. We argue that best edge definition for a network is a decision that can be made using a priori knowledge about the species and that is independent from the hypotheses that the network will ultimately be used to evaluate. We illustrate this approach with a study conducted on a colonial cooperatively breeding bird, the sociable weaver. We first identified two ways of collecting data using different numbers of feeders and three ways to define associations among birds. We then evaluated which combination of data collection and association definition maximized (a) the assortment of individuals into previously known "breeding groups" (birds that contribute toward the same nest and maintain cohesion when foraging) and (b) socially differentiated relationships (more strong and weak relationships than expected by chance). This evaluation of different methods based on a priori knowledge of the study species can be implemented in a diverse array of study systems and makes the case for using existing, biologically meaningful knowledge about a system to help navigate the myriad of methodological decisions about data collection and network inference.

Indexed as

assortativitygroup livingmethodsPhiletairus sociussocial behaviorsocial network analysis

Identifiers

PMID32953051
PMCPMC7487238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.