Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36258108›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2023

On maximization of the modularity index in network psychometrics.

Michael J Brusco, Douglas Steinley, Ashley L Watts

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Improving the Walktrap Algorithm UsingMultivariate behavioral research
    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

3 authors.

Michael J BruscoDepartment of Business Analytics, Information Systems, and Supply Chain, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA. mbrusco@fsu.edu.
Douglas SteinleyDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.
Ashley L WattsDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.

Funding

Resolving the AUD Phenotype: Unique and Transdiagnostic Features and Genetic HeterogeneityK99AA028306 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI WATTS, ASHLEY L. · 2021 to 2022
$249k
NIAAA NIH HHS K99 AA028306
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The modularity index (Q) is an important criterion for many community detection heuristics used in network psychometrics and its subareas (e.g., exploratory graph analysis). Some heuristics seek to directly maximize Q, whereas others, such as the walktrap algorithm, only use the modularity index post hoc to determine the number of communities. Researchers in network psychometrics have typically not employed methods that are guaranteed to find a partition that maximizes Q, perhaps because of the complexity of the underlying mathematical programming problem. In this paper, for networks of the size commonly encountered in network psychometrics, we explore the utility of finding the partition that maximizes Q via formulation and solution of a clique partitioning problem (CPP). A key benefit of the CPP is that the number of communities is naturally determined by its solution and, therefore, need not be prespecified in advance. The results of two simulation studies comparing maximization of Q to two other methods that seek to maximize modularity (fast greedy and Louvain), as well as one popular method that does not (walktrap algorithm), provide interesting insights as to the relative performances of the methods with respect to identification of the correct number of communities and the recovery of underlying community structure.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputer SimulationHumansPsychometricsClique partitioningModularity indexNetwork psychometricsWalktrap algorithm

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.