Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41245510›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in sociology2025

Love, culture, rationality, and learning in repeated games.

Andrés Cendales, Luis Eduardo López-Montenegro, Hugo Guerrero-Sierra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in sociology, 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.

Andrés CendalesDepartamento de Economía y Administración, Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Universidad de Caldas, Manizales, Colombia.
Luis Eduardo López-MontenegroDepartamento de Matemáticas, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Caldas, Manizales, Colombia.
Hugo Guerrero-SierraFacultad de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, Cajicá, Colombia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dynamics within romantic relationships reflect and influence broader family structures. This article examines family dynamics by analyzing various social identities and power structures, such as gender and social class, through a rational choice methodological approach. It challenges the notion that past family stability was due to stronger values, arguing instead that it was supported by oppressive structures, primarily patriarchal. By critiquing these power structures, we aim to present a more inclusive and equitable perspective on family dynamics. We introduce a rational choice model from game theory to analyze stability patterns in romantic relationships, focusing on empathy coefficients and cultural factors. This model investigates the role of economic altruism theory and cultural identities in shaping empathy and their impact on relationships. The study also explores individual wellbeing across different cultural contexts, including representations of courtly love and patriarchal norms. An instrumental rationality perspective is proposed to address the irrationality of love from a rational standpoint in family literature. Simulation is crucial for validating the model and evaluating the assumptions in realistic contexts. It provides insights into the model's behavior under various conditions, highlighting limitations and aspects previously unconsidered. This approach is essential for verifying implementation, validating assumptions, and exploring data uncertainties. By employing this methodology, future research can gain a deeper understanding of the complexities in family dynamics and romantic relationships.

Indexed as

computational simulationculturegame theorylearningloverationalityrepeated games

Identifiers

PMID41245510
PMCPMC12615449

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.