Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33202174›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2020

The effect of social balance on social fragmentation.

Tuan Minh Pham, Imre Kondor, Rudolf Hanel, Stefan Thurner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Why more social interactions lead to more polarization in societies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Empirical social triad statistics can be explained with dyadic homophylic interactions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors.

Tuan Minh PhamSection for Science of Complex Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Imre KondorComplexity Science Hub Vienna, Josefstädter Straße 39, 1080 Wien, Austria.
Rudolf HanelSection for Science of Complex Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Stefan ThurnerSection for Science of Complex Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 29252
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the availability of internet, social media, etc., the interconnectedness of people within most societies has increased tremendously over the past decades. Across the same timespan, an increasing level of fragmentation of society into small isolated groups has been observed. With a simple model of a society, in which the dynamics of individual opinion formation is integrated with social balance, we show that these two phenomena might be tightly related. We identify a critical level of interconnectedness, above which society fragments into sub-communities that are internally cohesive and hostile towards other groups. This critical communication density necessarily exists in the presence of social balance, and arises from the underlying mathematical structure of a phase transition known from the theory of disordered magnets called spin glasses. We discuss the consequences of this phase transition for social fragmentation in society.

Indexed as

Social MediaCommunicationHumanscoevolutionary dynamicsopinion formationphase transitionssocial balancesocial cohesionsocial fragmentation

Identifiers

PMID33202174
PMCPMC7729043

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.