The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reducing college students’ social perception biases through social network intervention
Abstract
In the present study, using complex network analysis, we conducted a one-year including two semesters to investigate the effect of social network intervention on college students’ social perception biases. One hundred and seventy college students participated in this study. Social network intervention was implemented in the second semester. Through changing individuals’ social neighbors and being augmented with four collaborative activities, modeling analysis showed students’ social perception biases were contingent on the level of homophily of their personal networks. Results also showed students’ social perception biases were significantly reduced after old social relationships being broken up and new social relationships being built. Furthermore, in the individual interviews, students reported heterogeneous re-grouping ensued by social network intervention offered them with opportunities of “Diversity of thinking”, “Creation of argumentative climates” and “Open-mindedness and inclusiveness change”.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous studies have emphasized the role of diverse cognitive profiles in promoting better learning outcomes (Wang & Li, 2021)”
From Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom (2025) · cites this paper as Wang & Li, 2021
Citations
Cites
The “majority illusion” in social networks
Lerman, K., Yan, X., & Wu, X.-Z. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147617 · Cited by 669
Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2016) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1155458 · Cited by 338
Reconceptualizing nature‐of‐science education in the age of social media
Höttecke, D., & Allchin, D. (2020) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21575 · Cited by 303 · cited 1×
“…literature of social psychology, limited exposure to “ alternative ideas ” leaded to a perception that the group ’ s agreement was not arti fi cially limited to a particular subset of the general population, but rather seemed to re fl ect the “ wisdom of the crowd ” (Höttecke & Allchin, 2020).”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 43
- 10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.004 · DOI
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199604074.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s12144-002-1020-0 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.1615978114 · DOI · Paper page
- Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods (4th). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford university press.
- 10.1126/science.1207055 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/bjet.12278 · DOI
- Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage.
- 10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100824 · DOI
- Edwards, A. A., & Dennis, J. A. (1973). Polyfit-A computer program for fitting a specified degree of polynomial to data points. NRPB-M, 11, 1–18.
- 10.1177/001872675400700202 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.07.005 · DOI
- 10.1017/S1930297500005921 · DOI
- 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003590 · DOI
- 10.1177/0013916511407308 · DOI
- Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2003). Conceptual and linguistic factors in inductive projection: How do young children recognize commonalities between animals and plants. Language in Mind, 313–334. · DOI
- 10.1088/1751-8113/46/45/455102 · DOI
- 10.1163/22125868-12340033 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41598-018-29405-7 · DOI
- 10.1080/07448481.2010.483709 · DOI
- 10.1002/tea.21385 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.596 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327957pspr0104_2 · DOI
- 10.1080/13504622.2018.1465893 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-642-31821-4_2 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4 · DOI
- 10.1080/09500693.2018.1545100 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.023 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.53.2.298 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.07.004 · DOI
- 10.1080/01411926.2010.548857 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2009.01625.x · DOI
- 10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/medu.13959 · DOI
- 10.1177/1477878512437472 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1467-8721.00191 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.211 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb00006.x · DOI
- 10.2139/ssrn.1470768 · DOI
- 10.4324/9781410606716-20 · DOI
- 10.1186/s41239-018-0115-0 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom
Scheidler, B., Layne, K., Gillard, M., & Doucet, B. M. (2025) · Journal of Occupational Therapy Education · doi:10.26681/jote.2025.090210
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, W., & Li, X.
- Affiliations
- Yangtze University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Xiaoshan
- Venue
- Interactive Learning Environments
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-12-12
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 5523-5537
- ISSN
- 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5191
- OpenAlex
- W4200430057
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 0.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Interactive Learning Environments (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- College Teaching Research Project of Hubei Province in China (2020420)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
- Keywords
- social network intervention, university students, homophily, social network structure, network reconfiguration, collaborative activities, open-mindedness, inclusivity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
