Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34427874›Full record

ArticleHuman nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.)2021

Being in the Know : Social Network Analysis of Gossip and Friendship on a College Campus.

Meltem Yucel, Gustav R Sjobeck, Rebecca Glass, Joshua Rottman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Openness to Being Gossiped About: Understanding Gossip from the Target's Perspective.Self and identity : the journal of the International Society for Self and Identity · 2025
    Article
  3. Gossiping for a reason: Revised Gossip Functions Questionnaire.Psychological test adaptation and development : official open access organ of the European Association of Psychological Assessment · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Meltem YucelDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, West Complex, CDW 2574, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA. nmy2bg@virginia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7274-5971
Gustav R SjobeckDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, West Complex, CDW 2574, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA.
Rebecca GlassInstitute for Graduate Clinical Psychology (IGCP), Widener University, Chester, PA, USA.
Joshua RottmanPsychology and Scientific & Philosophical Studies of Mind, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2284-1428

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gossip (evaluative talk about others) is ubiquitous. Gossip allows important rules to be clarified and reinforced, and it allows individuals to keep track of their social networks while strengthening their bonds to the group. The purpose of this study is to decipher the nature of gossip and how it relates to friendship connections. To measure how gossip relates to friendship, participants from men's and women's collegiate competitive rowing (crew) teams (N = 44) noted their friendship connections and their tendencies to gossip about each of their teammates. Using social network analysis, we found that the crew members' friend group connectedness significantly correlated with their positive and negative gossip network involvement. Higher connectedness among friends was associated with less involvement in spreading negative gossip and/or being a target of negative gossip. More central connectedness to the friend group was associated with more involvement in spreading positive gossip and/or being a target of positive gossip. These results suggest that the spread of both positive and negative gossip may influence and be influenced by friendship connections in a social network.

Indexed as

FriendsSocial Network AnalysisCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleMenUniversitiesFriendshipGossipNegative gossipPositive gossipSocial network analysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.