ArticleBehavior research methods2025
The impact of dichotomization on network recovery.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. 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.
- Association between information overload, asthenopia, and depressive and anxiety symptoms in patients with lung cancer: A computer-simulated network analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Comparison of depressive symptoms between heterosexual and sexual minority university students: network analysis.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2026Article
- Exploring Network Relationships Between Health Status and Frailty in COPD Patients with Multimorbidity: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Graphical models have become an important method for studying the network structure of multivariate psychological data. Accurate recovery of the underlying network structure is paramount and requires that the models are appropriate for the data at hand. Traditionally, Gaussian graphical models for continuous data and Ising models for binary data have dominated the literature. However, psychological research often relies on ordinal data from Likert scale items, creating a model-data mismatch. This paper examines the effect of dichotomizing ordinal variables on network recovery, as opposed to analyzing the data at its original level of measurement, using a Bayesian analysis of the ordinal Markov random field model. This model is implemented in the R package bgms. Our analysis shows that dichotomization results in a loss of information, which affects the accuracy of network recovery. This is particularly true when considering the interplay between the dichotomization cutoffs used and the distribution of the ordinal categories. In addition, we demonstrate a difference in accuracy when using dichotomized data, depending on whether edges are included or excluded in the true network, which highlights the effectiveness of the ordinal model in recovering conditional independence relationships. These findings underscore the importance of using models that deal directly with ordinal data to ensure more reliable and valid inferred network structures in psychological research.
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.