Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40976596›Full record

ArticlePsyCh journal2025

Enhancing the Cohesion and Influence of Minority Opinions Through Clustering: A Social Network Experiment.

Baizhou Wu, Jun Liu, Ying Li, Chenran Shen-Zhang, Shenghua Luan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PsyCh journal, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Baizhou WuChinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7966-7497
Jun LiuChinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Beijing, China.
Ying LiChinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0678-9535
Chenran Shen-ZhangChinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Beijing, China.
Shenghua LuanChinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9170-1416

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 32171074
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minority opinions can be of crucial importance to the diversity, productivity, and harmony of a group, but are often left unattended and unheard. Previous methods that tried to enhance minority influence are usually overly forceful and low on ecological validity. To overcome these pitfalls, we proposed a new intervention method called minority clustering and examined its effects with a social network experiment (N = 456). Minority clustering was implemented by increasing the network connections among participants with initial opinions that deviated from the mainstream opinion and forming an opinion cluster among these minority members. Our results show that minority clustering significantly slowed down the rate at which minority members shifted toward majority opinions, thereby sustaining minority cohesion, and moved majority members closer to minority opinions, thus enhancing minority influence. An additional filter bubble intervention, through which all members of a network were exposed to neighbors with similar opinions to their own, further strengthened minority cohesion but weakened minority influence. Minority clustering is an unobtrusive intervention that does not need overt cooperations of network members and can be implemented easily in social media platforms. The working mechanisms of minority clustering and its effects on group opinion formation are further discussed.

Indexed as

AttitudeMinority GroupsSocial NetworkingSocial SupportAdultCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adultfilter bubbleminority influencepublic opinionsocial influencesocial network

Identifiers

PMID40976596
PMCPMC12702592

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.