Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35116162›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2022

The formation of political discussion networks.

Marian-Gabriel Hâncean, Matjaž Perc, Adrian Gheorghiță, George G Vega Yon, Bianca-Elena Mihăilă

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Marian-Gabriel HânceanDepartment of Sociology, University of Bucharest, 90-92 Panduri St., Bucharest 050663, Romania.ORCID 0000-0001-9358-5287
Matjaž PercFaculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University of Maribor, Koroška cesta 160, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-3087-541X
Adrian GheorghițăDepartment of Political Science, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, 30 Expoziției Blvd., Bucharest 012244, Romania.
George G Vega YonDivision of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, 295 Chipeta Way Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3171-0844
Bianca-Elena MihăilăDepartment of Sociology, University of Bucharest, 90-92 Panduri St., Bucharest 050663, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-4930-450X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dialogues among politicians provide a window into political landscapes and relations among parties and nations. Existing research has focused on the outcomes of such dialogues and on the structure of social networks on which they take place. Little is known, however, about how political discussion networks form and which are the main driving forces behind their formation. We study a collection of ego-networks from 30 randomly sampled Romanian politicians to reveal fundamental processes behind the formation of political discussion networks. We show that ties in such networks tend to be strong and balanced, and that their organization is not affected by sex, age or education homophily. We use the exponential family of random graph models for small networks to assess likely closure mechanisms and possible homophily effects, but we note that further research and additional data are needed to fully understand the impact of context and political affiliations on the generalization of our findings.

Indexed as

ergmitoexponential random graph models for small networkshomophilypolitical discussion networks

Identifiers

PMID35116162
PMCPMC8790369

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.