Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37809809›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Trust levels in social networks.

Santanu Acharjee, Akhil Thomas Panicker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Santanu AcharjeeDepartment of Mathematics, Gauhati University, Assam, India.
Akhil Thomas PanickerDepartment of Physics, Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kerala, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dunbar's number is the cognitive limit of an individual to maintain stable relationships with others in his network. It is based on the size of the neocortex of the human brain. On the other hand, trust is one of the major issues for one while selecting members for his social network and the evolution of his social network with time. Trust and Dunbar's number are interconnected in the case of one's stable social network. Trust needs time to be built after several social interactions, intimacy, etc. In this paper, we try to provide answers to the following important questions related to social networks: (i) Do trust levels remain the same for individuals from one's perspective in his social network when the network size increases? (ii) What is the relation between the power-law exponent α and the trust cutoff? (iii) Do trust levels help to diffuse information quickly or vice versa to reach Dunbar's number 150 along with hierarchy layers of 5, 15, and 50 individuals in networks of different sizes? We find that there is a requirement for trust levels to increase among the same individuals in one's social network if the size of the network increases. As a relation between the power-law exponent α and the trust cutoff, it is found that

Indexed as

Dunbar's numberEvolutionary biologyNeocortexPower-law distributionPower-law exponentSocial networksTrustUniform distribution

Identifiers

PMID37809809
PMCPMC10559249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.