Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35194066›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Collective patterns and stable misunderstandings in networks striving for consensus without a common value system.

Johannes Falk, Edwin Eichler, Katja Windt, Marc-Thorsten Hütt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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

4 authors.

Johannes FalkDepartment of Life Sciences and Chemistry, Jacobs University, Bremen, Germany. j.falk@jacobs-university.de.
Edwin EichlerEICHLER Consulting AG, Weggis, Switzerland.
Katja WindtSMS Group GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Marc-Thorsten HüttDepartment of Life Sciences and Chemistry, Jacobs University, Bremen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collective phenomena in systems of interacting agents have helped us understand diverse social, ecological and biological observations. The corresponding explanations are challenged by incorrect information processing. In particular, the models typically assume a shared understanding of signals or a common truth or value system, i.e., an agreement of whether the measurement or perception of information is 'right' or 'wrong'. It is an open question whether a collective consensus can emerge without these conditions. Here we introduce a model of interacting agents that strive for consensus, however, each with only a subjective perception of the world. Our communication model does not presuppose a definition of right or wrong and the actors can hence not distinguish between correct and incorrect observations. Depending on a single parameter that governs how responsive the agents are to changing their world-view we observe a transition between an unordered phase of individuals that are not able to communicate with each other and a phase of an emerging shared signalling framework. We find that there are two types of convention-aligned clusters: one, where all social actors in the cluster have the same set of conventions, and one, where neighbouring actors have different but compatible conventions ('stable misunderstandings').

Identifiers

PMID35194066
PMCPMC8863898

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.