Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35846654›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Cognitive-Behavioral Differences Between Officials and Folks in China's Targeted Poverty Alleviation: An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective.

Zhi Chen, Chao Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Zhi ChenInstitute of Economic Research, Hubei Academy of Social Sciences, Wuhan, China.
Chao YangInstitute of Economic Research, Hubei Academy of Social Sciences, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

China has historically eliminated absolute poverty and built a comprehensive well-off society through targeted poverty alleviation, at the end of which, however, many issues are worthy of scholars' attention kept emerging. A significant one was cognitive-behavioral differences between officials and folks regarding the procedure, standards, and methods of removing the poverty hats, which formed a new social dilemma called the official-folk game. Officials did not carry out targeted poverty alleviation work in strict accordance with the criteria specified by the government. In comparison, folks who have reached poverty elimination standards were unwilling to take off their poverty hats after targeted assistance due to the fear of returning to poverty. To fully explain this social dilemma, this study analyzes the causes of cognitive-behavioral differences between officials and folks in China's targeted poverty alleviation from the perspective of evolutionary game theory. The results show that bounded rational officials and folks will eventually get caught up in the prisoner's dilemma without exogenous factors' intervention. Furthermore, the study proposes that the government establish reasonable punishment, incentives, and supervision mechanisms to guide officials and folks and eliminate their cognitive-behavioral differences by investigating the influence of exogenous policy factors on the evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) of the official-folk game. This finding not only reveals the formation mechanism of the cognitive-behavioral differences between officials and folks and presents an effective solution at the individual level but also provides a reference for other developing countries to overcome similar social dilemmas in the process of eliminating absolute poverty.

Indexed as

bounded rationalitycognitive-behavioral differencesevolutionary game theoryofficial-folk gamepolicy factorstargeted poverty alleviation

Identifiers

PMID35846654
PMCPMC9278326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.