Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39813193›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Spatiotemporal evolution of hedging effects in Asia-Pacific countries amid Sino-US competition: Insights from massive event data.

Qiyue Hu, Lihua Yuan, Bin Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. 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

3 authors.

Qiyue HuCenter for Geodata and Analysis, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1696-327X
Lihua YuanCenter for Geodata and Analysis, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Bin LiuSchool of Business, Guangxi University, Nanning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facing the pressure of Sino-US strategic competition, countries in the Asia-Pacific region often adopt hedging strategies to minimize risk and protect their interests. If implemented, these strategies could impact relationships between countries and lead to political instability. Owing to a lack of theoretical evaluation frameworks and methods, few studies have examined the implementation effects of hedging strategies adopted by Asia-Pacific countries amid Sino-US competition. This study proposes a novel four-quadrant evaluation theoretical framework, and constructs a Geopolitical Relation Index and a Comparative Relation Index based on the Global Database of Events, Language, and Tone massive event data. Since 2000, the effects of hedging strategies in 19 Asia-Pacific countries against China and the US have been dynamically quantified. The research reveals that Asia-Pacific countries' dynamic performances over 24 years can be categorized into three groups: significantly closer to China, significantly closer to the US, and swinging. Since implementing the Belt and Road Initiative, countries close to China have deepened their ties, while those aligned with the US have strengthened their ties. Asia-Pacific countries have demonstrated similar characteristics from Obama's presidency to Biden's presidency. The results contribute to the dynamic assessment and ongoing monitoring of the execution effects of Asia-Pacific countries' diplomatic strategies towards China and the US, offering valuable insights for timely refinement of their foreign policies.

Indexed as

International CooperationPoliticsAsiaChinaHumansSpatio-Temporal AnalysisUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39813193
PMCPMC11734938

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.