↓ Skip to main content

Indirectly connected: simple social differences can explain the causes and apparent consequences of complex social network positions

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
107 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
Title
Indirectly connected: simple social differences can explain the causes and apparent consequences of complex social network positions
Published in
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, November 2017
DOI 10.1098/rspb.2017.1939
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josh A. Firth, Ben C. Sheldon, Lauren J. N. Brent

Abstract

Animal societies are often structurally complex. How individuals are positioned within the wider social network (i.e. their indirect social connections) has been shown to be repeatable, heritable and related to key life-history variables. Yet, there remains a general lack of understanding surrounding how complex network positions arise, whether they indicate active multifaceted social decisions by individuals, and how natural selection could act on this variation. We use simulations to assess how variation in simple social association rules between individuals can determine their positions within emerging social networks. Our results show that metrics of individuals' indirect connections can be more strongly related to underlying simple social differences than metrics of their dyadic connections. External influences causing network noise (typical of animal social networks) generally inflated these differences. The findings demonstrate that relationships between complex network positions and other behaviours or fitness components do not provide sufficient evidence for the presence, or importance, of complex social behaviours, even if direct network metrics provide less explanatory power than indirect ones. Interestingly however, a plausible and straightforward heritable basis for complex network positions can arise from simple social differences, which in turn creates potential for selection to act on indirect connections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 107 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 33%
Researcher 22 17%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 16 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 47%
Psychology 18 14%
Environmental Science 7 5%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 30 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 87. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2021.
All research outputs
#289,353
of 17,580,401 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#826
of 8,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,583
of 325,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#18
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,580,401 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.