ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024
Paradoxes in the coevolution of contagions and institutions.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Homophily within and across groups.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Characteristic scales and adaptation in higher-order contagions.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Adaptive human behavior and delays in information availability autonomously modulate epidemic waves.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Paradoxes in the coevolution of contagions and institutions.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Epidemic models study the spread of undesired agents through populations, be it infectious diseases through a country, misinformation in social media or pests infesting a region. In combating these epidemics, we rely neither on global top-down interventions, nor solely on individual adaptations. Instead, interventions commonly come from local institutions such as public health departments, moderation teams on social media platforms or other forms of group governance. Classic models, which are often individual or agent-based, are ill-suited to capture local adaptations. We leverage developments of institutional dynamics based on cultural group selection to study how groups attempt local control of an epidemic by taking inspiration from the successes and failures of other groups. Incorporating institutional changes into epidemic dynamics reveals paradoxes: a higher transmission rate can result in smaller outbreaks as does decreasing the speed of institutional adaptation. When groups perceive a contagion as more worrisome, they can invest in improved policies and, if they maintain these policies long enough to have impact, lead to a reduction in endemicity. By looking at the interplay between the speed of institutions and the transmission rate of the contagions, we find rich coevolutionary dynamics that reflect the complexity of known biological and social contagions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.