Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35903728›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2022

Is Distributional Justice Equivalent to Prosocial Sharing in Children's Cognition?

Yuning Zhu, Jingmiao Zhang, Xiuli Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Yuning ZhuSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China.
Jingmiao ZhangSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China.
Xiuli LiuSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distribution and sharing are social preference behaviors supported and shaped by selection pressures, which express individuals' concern for the welfare of others. Distributive behavior results in distributive justice, which is at the core of moral justice. Sharing is a feature of the prosocial realm. The connotations of distribution and sharing are different, so the principles, research paradigms, and social functions of the two are also different. Three potential causes of confusion between the two in the current research on distribution and sharing are discussed. First, they share common factors in terms of individual cognition, situation, and social factors. Second, although they are conceptually different, prosocial sharing and distribution fairness sensitivity are mutually predictive in individual infants. Similarly, neural differences in preschoolers' perception of distribution fairness predict their subsequent sharing generosity. Finally, similar activation regions are relevant to distribution and sharing situations that need behavioral control on a neural basis.

Indexed as

confusionconnectiondistinguishdistributionsharing

Identifiers

PMID35903728
PMCPMC9315223

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.