Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41343568›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Whether groups value agreement or dissent depends on the strength of consensus.

James C Mellody

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. 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

1 author.

James C MellodyCenter for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5827-9652

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

I investigate the conditions under which groups value agreement versus dissent in collective decision-making processes. I argue that which kind of contribution a group values more will depend on the strength of the consensus. As a consensus evolves from weak to moderate to strong, I predict that groups will prefer agreement, dissent, and then agreement again. These predictions are in line with a multi-phase decision-making process in which groups pursue sequential goals reflected in the evolving consensus: establishing an initial consensus, exploring alternative perspectives, and settling on a final decision. I test these predictions with data from the Reddit community r/AmItheAsshole, in which people make normative judgments of social situations. I find support for the predicted pattern, with one caveat: when the consensus is strong, groups exhibit no preference for agreement or dissent.

Indexed as

ConsensusDecision MakingDissent and DisputesGroup ProcessesHumansJudgment

Identifiers

PMID41343568
PMCPMC12677769

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.