ArticleScientific reports2025
Social and spatial predictors of collective search behaviors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Collaborative Wayfinding: A Critical Review.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive scienceReview
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
Understanding crowd behavior is critical for designing buildings and public spaces with efficient circulation. However, the interplay of social and spatial contexts makes this endeavor challenging. This paper examines scenarios in which crowds perform a search task with time constraints, akin to individuals shopping or officers searching a crime area. We formulate and test two sets of hypotheses defined at the crowd and individual levels using desktop VR experiments. We conducted four experimental sessions that employed different social incentives (collaborative versus competitive) with a total of 140 participants, using a mixed factorial design where each individual participated in 12 trials. We found that competitive incentives produced higher levels of crowd aggregation than collaborative incentives. In addition, individuals were more likely to be influenced by others' behaviors in the collaborative compared to the competitive condition. Notably, these social signals were conveyed among participants without any verbal communication. We also developed a novel graph theoretic measure, "search attractiveness," that accurately predicts space occupation during a search task. This paper highlights the roles of social and spatial contexts in understanding occupation and aggregation.
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.