SIENA model results
| Effect | Estimate | Standard error | Significance | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outdegree (density) | –1.07 | 0.27 | p < 0.01 | Networks were sparse; ties formed selectively |
| Reciprocity | 0.71 | 0.32 | p < 0.05 | Mutual ties more likely than chance |
| Transitive triplets | 0.24 | 0.07 | p < 0.01 | Triadic closure reinforced cohesive clusters |
| Psychological distress selection | –0.37 | 0.15 | p < 0.05 | Members with higher distress were less likely to be chosen as friends |
| Psychological distress influence | 0.41 | 0.70 | ns | No significant peer convergence in distress levels |
| Phoenix duration | –0.59 | 0.59 | ns | Longer tenure did not predict greater improvement |
| Effect | Estimate | Standard error | Significance | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| –1.07 | 0.27 | Networks were sparse; ties formed selectively | ||
| 0.71 | 0.32 | Mutual ties more likely than chance | ||
| 0.24 | 0.07 | Triadic closure reinforced cohesive clusters | ||
| –0.37 | 0.15 | Members with higher distress were less likely to be chosen as friends | ||
| 0.41 | 0.70 | ns | No significant peer convergence in distress levels | |
| –0.59 | 0.59 | ns | Longer tenure did not predict greater improvement |
ns = nonsignificant, Convergence ratio = 0.16, indicating acceptable model fit
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.