IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2511.19017.html

"Don't Fall Behind": A Unified Framework of Dynastic Survival, Two-Stage Belief Error, and the Modern Involution Trap

Author

Listed:
  • Dong Yang

Abstract

We set out to solve a dual puzzle regarding reproductive strategies: The "Ancient vs. Modern" Puzzle (why pre-modern elites adopted a "Survival" strategy while modern elites adopt an "Anxiety" strategy) and the "Class Divide" Puzzle (why modern involution manifests as a U-shaped fertility pattern). We develop a unified computational framework (DP + Monte Carlo) that introduces Cognitive Heterogeneity across classes. Our Hybrid Model (M-H) posits that the poor act as "Rational Survivors" (M1 utility, Reality parameters), while the middle/rich act as "Biased Strivers" (M4b utility, Belief parameters). Our simulations yield three core findings. First, we confirm that the "Survival" strategy is objectively rational whenever risk exceeds a low threshold ($\sigma > 0.45$). Given that real-world risk is massive ($\sigma_{Real} \approx 4.9$), the modern "Quality" strategy is objectively fragile. Second, the trap for the Middle/Rich ($B \ge 200$) is driven by a "Two-Stage Belief Error": they are first "baited" by a Causal Error (underestimating risk) to enter the status game, and then "trapped" by a Marginal Error (underestimating returns) which triggers a stop in fertility. Third, the U-shape is driven by the cognitive divide. The Poor escape the trap by retaining a "Rational Survival" strategy in the face of real high risk. Conversely, the Aspirational Middle Class ($HC \approx 12, B \ge 200$) is uniquely trapped by their Biased Beliefs. Their high competence raises their dynastic reference point ($R$) to a level where, under perceived low returns, restricting fertility to $N=1$ becomes the only rational choice within their biased belief system.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong Yang, 2025. ""Don't Fall Behind": A Unified Framework of Dynastic Survival, Two-Stage Belief Error, and the Modern Involution Trap," Papers 2511.19017, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2511.19017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.19017
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Heckman & Flavio Cunha, 2007. "The Technology of Skill Formation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 31-47, May.
    2. Flavio Cunha & James J. Heckman & Susanne M. Schennach, 2010. "Estimating the Technology of Cognitive and Noncognitive Skill Formation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(3), pages 883-931, May.
    3. Garance Genicot & Debraj Ray, 2017. "Aspirations and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 489-519, March.
    4. Gary S. Becker & H. Gregg Lewis, 1974. "Interaction between Quantity and Quality of Children," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of the Family: Marriage, Children, and Human Capital, pages 81-90, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    6. Matthias Doepke & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2017. "Parenting With Style: Altruism and Paternalism in Intergenerational Preference Transmission," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1331-1371, September.
    7. Francesco Agostinelli & Matthew Wiswall, 2025. "Estimating the Technology of Children’s Skill Formation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 133(3), pages 846-887.
    8. Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2004. "Running to Keep in the Same Place: Consumer Choice as a Game of Status," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1085-1107, September.
    9. Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2005. "Neighbors as Negatives: Relative Earnings and Well-Being," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(3), pages 963-1002.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lekfuangfu, Warn N. & Odermatt, Reto, 2022. "All I have to do is dream? The role of aspirations in intergenerational mobility and well-being," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Cameron Taylor, 2024. "Why do families foster children? A Beckerian approach," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 261-293, March.
    3. Thérèse McDonnell, 2016. "Non-cognitive development in infancy: the influence of maternal employment and the mediating role of childcare," Working Papers 201606, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    4. Breitkopf, Laura & Chowdhury, Shyamal K. & Priyam, Shambhavi & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Do economic preferences of children predict behavior?," DICE Discussion Papers 342, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    5. Dilnoza Muslimova & Hans van Kippersluis & Cornelius A. Rietveld & Stephanie von Hinke & S. Fleur W. Meddens, 2020. "Nature-nurture interplay in educational attainment," Papers 2012.05021, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    6. James J. Heckman & Stefano Mosso, 2014. "The Economics of Human Development and Social Mobility," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 689-733, August.
    7. Deborah A. Cobb-Clark & Nicolás Salamanca & Anna Zhu, 2019. "Parenting style as an investment in human development," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 1315-1352, October.
    8. Benaya Lie, 2024. "The effect and timing sensitivity of parenting style on cognitive and non‐cognitive skills," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(S1), pages 115-123, May.
    9. Kim, Jun Hyung & Schulz, Wolfgang & Zimmermann, Tanja & Hahlweg, Kurt, 2018. "Parent–child interactions and child outcomes: Evidence from randomized intervention," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 152-171.
    10. repec:iae:iaewps:wp2016n3 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Jorge Luis García & James J. Heckman, 2023. "Parenting Promotes Social Mobility Within and Across Generations," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 349-388, September.
    12. Grace Lordan & Paul Frijters, 2013. "Unplanned Pregnancy And The Impact On Sibling Health Outcomes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(8), pages 903-914, August.
    13. Michela Carlana & Eliana La Ferrara & Paolo Pinotti, 2022. "Goals and Gaps: Educational Careers of Immigrant Children," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 1-29, January.
    14. Kiessling, Lukas, 2021. "How do parents perceive the returns to parenting styles and neighborhoods?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    15. Jianxun Lyu, 2025. "Optimal sequential fertility choices under discriminatory preferences," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 1-51, March.
    16. Utteeyo Dasgupta & Subha Mani & Smriti Sharma & Saurabh Singhal, 2020. "Social Identity, Behavior, and Personality," Working Papers 308280016, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    17. Chen, Yefeng & Yang, Wenyuan & Luo, Gansong & Luo, Jun, 2024. "Choosing tournament for children: Parenting style and information intervention," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    18. Daniel Schunk & Isabell Zipperle, 2023. "Fairness and inequality acceptance in children and adolescents: A survey on behaviors in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 1715-1742, December.
    19. Gahramanov, Emin & Hasanov, Rashad & Tang, Xueli, 2020. "Parental involvement and Children's human capital: A tax-subsidy experiment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 16-29.
    20. Jingdong Zhong & Jingjing Gao & Chengfang Liu & Jie Huang & Renfu Luo, 2019. "Quantity–Quality Trade-Off and Early Childhood Development in Rural Family: Evidence from China’s Guizhou Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-29, April.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2511.19017. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.