Title:Network Dependence and Confounding by Network Structure Lead to Invalid Inference

Abstract: Researchers across the health and social sciences generally assume that observations are independent, even while relying on convenience samples that draw subjects from one or a small number of communities, schools, hospitals, etc. A paradigmatic example of this is the Framingham Heart Study (FHS). Many of the limitations of such samples are well-known, but the issue of statistical dependence due to social network ties has not previously been addressed. We show that, along with anticonservative variance estimation, this network dependence can result in confounding by network structure that biases associations away from the null. Using a statistical test that we adapted from one developed for spatial autocorrelation, we test for network dependence and for possible confounding by network structure in several of the thousands of influential papers published using FHS data. Results suggest that some of the many decades of research on coronary heart disease, other health outcomes, and peer influence using FHS data may be biased and anticonservative due to unacknowledged network dependence. We conclude that these issues are not unique to the FHS; as researchers in psychology, medicine, and beyond grapple with replication failures, this unacknowledged source of invalid statistical inference should be part of the conversation.