deletions | additions       diff --git a/untitled.md b/untitled.md  index 600fdc1..20f6d54 100644  --- a/untitled.md  +++ b/untitled.md 
...
#current state of affairs  Van Der Heijden, Peter GM, Ger van Gils, JAN Bouts, and Joop Hox. 2000. “A Compar-  ison of Randomized Response, Computer-Assisted Self-Interview, and Face-to-Face  Direct Questioning Eliciting Sensitive Information in the Context of Welfare and Un-  employment Benefit.” Sociological Methods & Research 28:505–537.  On the psychology of poverty.  Haushofer J1, Fehr E2.  Author information  Abstract  Poverty remains one Baslevent, C. and Kirmanoglu, H., 2011. Discerning self‐interested behaviour in attitudes towards welfare state responsibilities across Europe. International Journal  of Social Welfare, 20(4), pp.344-352.  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cynthia_Lee4/publication/276948739_Content_Cause_and_Consequences_of_Job_Insecurity_A_Theory-Based_Measure_and_Substantive_Test/links/5617317408ae1a88800367dd.pdf  This research assessed  the most pressing problems facing the world; the mechanisms through which poverty arises causes  andperpetuates itself, however, are not well understood. Here, we examine the evidence for the hypothesis that poverty may have particular psychological  consequences that can lead to economic behaviors that make it difficult of joh insecurity  using a new theory-hased measure incorporating recent conceptual arguments.  We also compared the measure's reliability and construct  validity  to escape poverty. The evidence indicates those of two existing global measures of joh insecurity. Results  indicated  that poverty causes stress personal, joh,  and negative affective states which organizational realities associated  with a perceived lack of control are correlated with measured job  insecurity. Joh insecurity  in turn may lead leads  to short-sighted and risk-averse decision-making, possibly by limiting attention and favoring habitual behaviors at the expense of goal-directed ones. Together, these relationships may constitute a feedback loop that contributes attitudinal reactions—  intentions  to quit, reduced commitment, and reduced satisfaction.  These results generally support  the perpetuation utility  ofpoverty. We conclude by pointing toward specific gaps in  our knowledge new measure  and outlining poverty alleviation programs that this mechanism suggests.  Copyright © 2014, American Association provide important directions  for the Advancement of Science.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24855262 future research.  Moral consequences of becoming unemployed 
...
http://sci-hub.cc/http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=2002-01632-005  Evidence from an Experiment on Charity to Welfare Recipients: Reciprocity, Altruism and the Empathic Responsiveness Hypothesis*  Authors  Christina M. Fong  First published: 2 July 2007Full publication history  DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2007.02076.xView/save citation  Cited by: 39 articlesCitation tools  Article has an altmetric score of 6  *  I am grateful to Erika Burkhalter for outstanding research assistance; to George Loewenstein, Jörgen Weibull, Lise Vesterlund, Urs Fischbacher, Linda Skitka, Alan Durell, Julie Downs, John Miller, Peter Thompson and seminar participants at Carnegie Mellon University, Boston University, and Wharton for helpful comments and discussion; and to Marcela Fields, Terence Chau and Tanya Ziegler for research assistance. Financial support was provided by a Behavioral Economics Small Grant from the Russell Sage Foundation and an Innovation Seed Grant from Carnegie Mellon University.  Abstract  This article investigates the determinants of generosity in an experiment on charity to real-life welfare recipients. It tests the effects of various measures of unconditional altruism and conditional or reciprocal altruism. The results show strong support for conditional or reciprocal altruism. However, people who are self-reported unconditional altruists make offers that are highly elastic with respect to the apparent worthiness of the recipient. One interpretation of this is that self-reported unconditional altruists have combined desires to help others and to reciprocate; unconditional altruism and reciprocal altruism may not be independent motives. I refer to this combination as empathic responsiveness.