ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Multiplexing in networks and diffusion.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. 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.
- Multiplexing in networks and diffusion.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We study multiplexing-the extent to which people have multiple, distinct types of relationships with the same others. We document empirical multiplexing patterns in Indian village data. We show that relationships such as socializing, advising, helping, and lending are correlated but distinct, while commonly used proxies for networks based on ethnicity and geography are nearly uncorrelated with actual relationships. We also show that these layers and their overlap affect information diffusion in a field experiment. On the theoretical side, we show that increased overlap in people's different types of relationships impedes the spread of simple contagions-such as diseases or basic information that spread through a single interaction. In contrast, such higher levels of multiplexing enhance the spread of a complex contagion (e.g., a behavior or belief that requires multiple interactions for transmission) when infection rates are low, but impede complex contagion if infection rates are high. Finally, we identify empirical differences in multiplexing by gender and connectedness.
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.