The Universal & Atomic Elements of Organization
A falsifiable scientific theory proposing that the same irreducible structures organize both thought and reality — from the quantum to the social scale.
O-Theory proposes that four irreducible structures — Distinctions, Systems, Relationships and Perspectives (DSRP) — form the universal grammar of organization. Rather than being merely useful ways of thinking, these structures are hypothesized to be the atomic elements from which every organized phenomenon emerges, whether in cognition, biology, physics, mathematics, society, or the cosmos.
| D | S | R | P |
| Distinctions | Systems | Relationships | Perspectives |
| Identity ↔ Other | Part ↔ Whole | Action ↔ Reaction | Point ↔ View |
| D := (i ↔ o) | S := (p ↔ w) | R := (a ↔ r) | P := (ṗ ↔ v) |
This is a living scientific evidence compendium: an open, continually evolving collection of independent empirical research, formal theory, mathematical proofs, cross-disciplinary analyses, applications, critiques, and proposed falsifications. Every entry is included because it supports, refines, challenges, or attempts to falsify the theory.
Scientific theories are strengthened not only by evidence that confirms their predictions, but also by surviving attempts to falsify them. This compendium brings both together: independent evidence from researchers who were not testing DSRP and proposed counterexamples evaluated against the formal theory.
One counterexample is enough to falsify O-Theory. Until then, the question remains: do the same four structures organize everything from quantum systems to human thought?
Independent convergence is one of the strongest forms of scientific evidence because researchers arrive at the same conclusion while investigating different questions for different reasons.
The number is not the point. Researchers in different fields, studying different questions with different methods, repeatedly arrived at the same structural predictions—almost always without testing DSRP or using its language.
Try a different term or clear the filters.
This compendium began as the peer-reviewed literature review “A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition,” published in the Journal of Systems Thinking with 109 studies. That paper is the peer-reviewed foundation. What you see here is its living, continuously updated version . New studies are checked before they are added, and the collection now holds and keeps growing. Open any card to see what the researchers found, why it bears on DSRP, and where the original review discusses it, the fuller account.
The collection is updated continuously, so the citation carries the date you consulted it rather than a study count — the count changes weekly, and putting it in the reference would make the same collection look like a different work to everyone who cites it. To cite a single claim or study, use its own address: every one has a permanent link.
This is the adversarial half of the compendium. Where the evidence track asks what converges on DSRP, this one asks what would end it: a single organized phenomenon whose structure needs a fifth pattern, a ninth element, or a fifth structural dynamic. It holds written up from candidates across territories, and resolutions — the general answers those cases settle against. Every case is published whether it held or failed, including the ones still open.
Cite this rather than the evidence collection when the point is what survived attack. The two are separate works with separate addresses: one asks what converges on the theory, the other asks what would end it, and a reference to the first does not support a claim about the second. Case and resolution numbers change when the record is revised, so cite a case by its own permanent link rather than by number.
This collection is meant to keep growing. Send us a study, paper, book or critique that bears on DSRP, whether it supports the theory or cuts against it, and we will read it and decide whether it belongs.
Authors Xingchen Xu, Qili Wang, Yizhi Liu, Liangfei Qiu
Year 2026
Publisher Management Science
Kind of work article
Discipline Business & Management
Secondary disciplines Economics
Applied false
Read it at the publisher 10.1287/mnsc.2022.03144
In the dynamic landscape of the digital economy, social trading platforms are experiencing rapid growth. Our study delves into the impact of changes in social audience size—measured by the number of followers—on traders' performance and behaviors. Utilizing data from a company-led randomized field experiment conducted on a prominent cryptocurrency social trading platform, we unearth intriguing findings. Traders garnering increased social audience size exhibit tendencies to trade more frequently, utilize higher leverage, and, surprisingly, attain poorer performance. Notably, these adverse effects intensify among traders who previously excelled, suggesting a link to overconfidence. Interestingly, our research uncovers a reference point effect associated with social audience size. Removing accumulated social audience size does not alleviate the negative consequences, instead, they persist. Additionally, we observe an extra adverse effect when traders experience a reduction in the digit magnitude of follower counts, supporting our hypothesis about social audience size serving as a reference point. Our study carries significant implications for the design of social trading platforms. It serves as a crucial reminder for both traders and platform managers to carefully navigate the interplay between social audience size dynamics and trading decisions.
To test whether a trader's number of social-media followers on a trading platform acts as a psychological reference point that shapes trading behavior and performance, using a live platform field experiment.
Traders on a major cryptocurrency social trading platform, studied through a company-led randomized field experiment that varied traders' follower counts.
Randomized field experiment on a live social trading platform comparing trading frequency, leverage use, and performance across traders whose follower counts were experimentally changed, including tests for whether removing accumulated followers reversed effects and whether crossing a round-number digit threshold (e.g., 10,000 to 9,999 followers) produced an additional effect.
Traders who gained more social-media followers on a trading platform traded more frequently, used higher leverage, and performed worse, with these effects persisting after followers were removed and intensifying when follower counts dropped across a round-number digit threshold, consistent with follower count functioning as a reference point.
The finding shows that traders evaluate the same objective quantity (follower count) differently depending on the reference point from which they view it, and that a categorical boundary crossing (a round-number digit threshold) intensifies that effect, illustrating perspective-dependent valuation paired with a distinction-based threshold.
Patterns it shows D, P
Added 2026-09-26
How to cite this Xingchen Xu, Qili Wang, Yizhi Liu, Liangfei Qiu (2026). Social Audience Size as a Reference Point: Evidence from a Field Experiment. Management Science.