Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321X16111601839112
N. Mauthner
Over the past two decades sociology, including the sociology of family and personal life, has seen a ‘relational turn’ with a growing body of work seeking to explain the ‘social’ by taking social relations as the primary object of sociological analyses. Relational sociologies theorise relations in social terms as either inter-actions or trans-actions. Inter-actions are relations that bring separate entities together, while trans-actions posit a relation of interdependence between entities. This article introduces a third way of conceptualising relationality as intra-actions drawing on the posthumanist relational ontology proposed by feminist philosopher and physicist Karen Barad. Intra-actions are understood as social-natural or material-discursive relations of ontological inseparability and mutual constitution. Using illustrative examples from the author’s research, the article suggests that Barad’s relational ontology offers a fruitful and distinctive ontological underpinning for relational sociology and for relational approaches to theorising and studying family practices.
{"title":"Karen Barad’s posthumanist relational ontology: an intra-active approach to theorising and studying family practices","authors":"N. Mauthner","doi":"10.1332/204674321X16111601839112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321X16111601839112","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades sociology, including the sociology of family and personal life, has seen a ‘relational turn’ with a growing body of work seeking to explain the ‘social’ by taking social relations as the primary object of sociological analyses. Relational\u0000 sociologies theorise relations in social terms as either inter-actions or trans-actions. Inter-actions are relations that bring separate entities together, while trans-actions posit a relation of interdependence between entities. This article introduces a third way of conceptualising relationality\u0000 as intra-actions drawing on the posthumanist relational ontology proposed by feminist philosopher and physicist Karen Barad. Intra-actions are understood as social-natural or material-discursive relations of ontological inseparability and mutual constitution. Using illustrative examples from\u0000 the author’s research, the article suggests that Barad’s relational ontology offers a fruitful and distinctive ontological underpinning for relational sociology and for relational approaches to theorising and studying family practices.","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"5 1","pages":"33-49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87072157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321x16111601166128
Katherine Twamley,Andrea Doucet,Eva-Maria Schmidt
{"title":"Introduction to special issue: relationality in family and intimate practices","authors":"Katherine Twamley,Andrea Doucet,Eva-Maria Schmidt","doi":"10.1332/204674321x16111601166128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321x16111601166128","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"2075 1","pages":"3-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138532381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674320x16062294691475
A. Hayward
This year saw significant changes to the structure and regulation of adult formalised relationships in England and Wales. On New Year’s Eve 2019 mixed-sex couples became eligible to register civil partnerships and join same-sex couples who had been able to enter such status since the scheme’s introduction in December 2005. Operating in parallel with the long-established status of marriage, mixed-sex civil partnerships were the product of concerted activism, the introduction of multiple private member’s bills into parliament, and a Supreme Court decision in Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State for International Development [2018] UKSC 32. That landmark case involved a challenge by a mixed-sex couple who were ideologically opposed to marriage and believed registering a mixed-sex civil partnership would give effect to a more egalitarian expression of their relationship. They were, however, refused that ability on the basis that in accordance with the statutory framework they were not ‘of the same sex’. After a lengthy process of litigation, a unanimous Supreme Court declared the provisions in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 prohibiting mixed-sex civil partnerships discriminatory and incompatible with human rights law (see Hayward, 2019). This ruling prompted action by parliament in the form of the Civil Partnerships, Marriages and Deaths (Registration etc.) Act 2019. Now that access to this regime is available for all couples, and thus in effect this jurisdiction operates a system of so-called ‘equal’ civil partnerships, questions now arise as to the future directions of this new status and its transformative potential for English family law. This article seeks to discover the lived experiences of those mixed-sex couples considering, registering, and enjoying civil partnerships. From the perspective of a legal academic specialising in domestic and comparative family law, this article will explore how mixed-sex civil partnerships are constituted by law and reflect on how that might influence couples’ experiences. Relationality, the core theme of this special edition, will also be considered, particularly when it is remembered that the very essence of a civil partnership is relational and, as with virtually all other civil union regimes operating elsewhere, dyadic. This focus will offer an opportunity to reflect on a key dispute in this area; namely, whether a system of mixed-sex civil partnerships can Families, Relationships and Societies
{"title":"Mixed-sex civil partnerships and relationality: a perspective from law","authors":"A. Hayward","doi":"10.1332/204674320x16062294691475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674320x16062294691475","url":null,"abstract":"This year saw significant changes to the structure and regulation of adult formalised relationships in England and Wales. On New Year’s Eve 2019 mixed-sex couples became eligible to register civil partnerships and join same-sex couples who had been able to enter such status since the scheme’s introduction in December 2005. Operating in parallel with the long-established status of marriage, mixed-sex civil partnerships were the product of concerted activism, the introduction of multiple private member’s bills into parliament, and a Supreme Court decision in Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State for International Development [2018] UKSC 32. That landmark case involved a challenge by a mixed-sex couple who were ideologically opposed to marriage and believed registering a mixed-sex civil partnership would give effect to a more egalitarian expression of their relationship. They were, however, refused that ability on the basis that in accordance with the statutory framework they were not ‘of the same sex’. After a lengthy process of litigation, a unanimous Supreme Court declared the provisions in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 prohibiting mixed-sex civil partnerships discriminatory and incompatible with human rights law (see Hayward, 2019). This ruling prompted action by parliament in the form of the Civil Partnerships, Marriages and Deaths (Registration etc.) Act 2019. Now that access to this regime is available for all couples, and thus in effect this jurisdiction operates a system of so-called ‘equal’ civil partnerships, questions now arise as to the future directions of this new status and its transformative potential for English family law. This article seeks to discover the lived experiences of those mixed-sex couples considering, registering, and enjoying civil partnerships. From the perspective of a legal academic specialising in domestic and comparative family law, this article will explore how mixed-sex civil partnerships are constituted by law and reflect on how that might influence couples’ experiences. Relationality, the core theme of this special edition, will also be considered, particularly when it is remembered that the very essence of a civil partnership is relational and, as with virtually all other civil union regimes operating elsewhere, dyadic. This focus will offer an opportunity to reflect on a key dispute in this area; namely, whether a system of mixed-sex civil partnerships can Families, Relationships and Societies","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46871764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321X16111320274832
A. Doucet
In the past decade, multiple compounding crises ‐ ecological, racial injustices, ‘care crises’ and multiple recent crises related to the COVID-19 pandemic ‐ have reinforced the powerful role of critical and social policy researchers to push back against ‘fake news’, ‘alternative facts’, and a post-truth era that denigrates science and evidence-based research. These new realities can pose challenges for social scientists who work within relational, ontological, non-representational, new materialist, performative, decolonising, or ecological ‘turns’ in social theory and epistemologies. This article’s overarching question is: How does one work within non-representational research paradigms while also attempting to hold onto representational, authoritative and convincing versions of truth, evidence, facts and data? Informed by my research on feminist philosopher and epistemologist Lorraine Code’s 40-year trajectory of writing about knowledge making and ecological social imaginaries, I navigate these dilemmas by calling on an unexpected ally to family sociology and family policy: the late American environmentalist Rachel Carson. Extending Code’s case study of Carson, I argue for an approach that combines (1) ecological relational ontologies, (2) the ethics and politics of knowledge making, (3) crossing social imaginaries of knowledge making and (4) a reconfigured view of knowledge makers as working towards just and cohabitable worlds.
{"title":"What does Rachel Carson have to do with family sociology and family policies? Ecological imaginaries, relational ontologies, and crossing social imaginaries","authors":"A. Doucet","doi":"10.1332/204674321X16111320274832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321X16111320274832","url":null,"abstract":"In the past decade, multiple compounding crises ‐ ecological, racial injustices, ‘care crises’ and multiple recent crises related to the COVID-19 pandemic ‐ have reinforced the powerful role of critical and social policy researchers to push back against ‘fake\u0000 news’, ‘alternative facts’, and a post-truth era that denigrates science and evidence-based research. These new realities can pose challenges for social scientists who work within relational, ontological, non-representational, new materialist, performative, decolonising,\u0000 or ecological ‘turns’ in social theory and epistemologies. This article’s overarching question is: How does one work within non-representational research paradigms while also attempting to hold onto representational, authoritative and convincing versions of truth, evidence,\u0000 facts and data? Informed by my research on feminist philosopher and epistemologist Lorraine Code’s 40-year trajectory of writing about knowledge making and ecological social imaginaries, I navigate these dilemmas by calling on an unexpected ally to family sociology and family policy:\u0000 the late American environmentalist Rachel Carson. Extending Code’s case study of Carson, I argue for an approach that combines (1) ecological relational ontologies, (2) the ethics and politics of knowledge making, (3) crossing social imaginaries of knowledge making and (4) a reconfigured\u0000 view of knowledge makers as working towards just and cohabitable worlds.","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43257775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321X16104823811079
Sadie K. Goddard-Durant, J. Sieunarine, A. Doucet
In this International Decade for People of African Descent,1 the spotlight in Canada and in other Western countries has turned to understanding and documenting the lived experiences of black communities. This interest by scholars is perhaps even greater over the last few months with the heightened attention around the world as the Black Lives Matter movements have highlighted anti-black racism in North America. However, reflective of the wider social injustices against black persons, there have been harmful relationships between researchers and black communities historically that has led to black communities mistrusting researchers (Davis et al, 2010; Scharff et al, 2010). These histories have parallels with critiques of the sustained damages of white settler scholarship on, but not with, Indigenous communities where, as Linda Tuhaiwi Smith famously noted that ‘“research” is probably one of the dirtiest words in the indigenous world’s vocabulary’ (Smith, 2012: 1). Moreover, more and more attention has been given to ethical research practices that go beyond simply getting ethical approval from research ethics boards (Tuck and Guishard, 2013; Doucet, 2018a). In particular, Indigenous communities and scholars who conduct research with them, and to a lesser extent black communities and scholars, have been calling for more attention to be paid to the nature and quality of the relationships that researchers are building with communities who have historically been oppressed in research and in society generally (Gibbs, 2001; Semali et al, 2007; Napoli, 2019). Specifically, Families, Relationships and Societies
在非洲人后裔国际十年中，加拿大和其他西方国家的焦点已转向了解和记录黑人社区的生活经历。在过去的几个月里，随着“黑人的命也是命”运动在北美突出了反黑人种族主义，全世界对这一问题的关注度越来越高，学者们的兴趣可能更加浓厚。然而，历史上研究人员和黑人社区之间存在有害的关系，导致黑人社区不信任研究人员，这反映了对黑人更广泛的社会不公正(Davis et al, 2010;Scharff et al, 2010)。这些历史与白人定居者奖学金对土著社区的持续损害的批评有相似之处，而不是与土著社区，正如琳达·图海维·史密斯(Linda Tuhaiwi Smith)著名的指出的那样，“研究”可能是土著世界词汇中最肮脏的词之一”(Smith, 2012: 1)。此外，越来越多的人关注伦理研究实践，而不仅仅是获得研究伦理委员会的伦理批准(Tuck and Guishard, 2013;下去,2018)。特别是，土著社区和与他们一起进行研究的学者，以及较小程度上的黑人社区和学者，一直在呼吁更多地关注研究人员与历史上在研究和社会中普遍受到压迫的社区建立的关系的性质和质量(Gibbs, 2001;Semali et al, 2007;那不勒斯,2019)。具体来说，家庭，关系和社会
{"title":"Decolonising research with black communities: developing equitable and ethical relationships between academic and community stakeholders","authors":"Sadie K. Goddard-Durant, J. Sieunarine, A. Doucet","doi":"10.1332/204674321X16104823811079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321X16104823811079","url":null,"abstract":"In this International Decade for People of African Descent,1 the spotlight in Canada and in other Western countries has turned to understanding and documenting the lived experiences of black communities. This interest by scholars is perhaps even greater over the last few months with the heightened attention around the world as the Black Lives Matter movements have highlighted anti-black racism in North America. However, reflective of the wider social injustices against black persons, there have been harmful relationships between researchers and black communities historically that has led to black communities mistrusting researchers (Davis et al, 2010; Scharff et al, 2010). These histories have parallels with critiques of the sustained damages of white settler scholarship on, but not with, Indigenous communities where, as Linda Tuhaiwi Smith famously noted that ‘“research” is probably one of the dirtiest words in the indigenous world’s vocabulary’ (Smith, 2012: 1). Moreover, more and more attention has been given to ethical research practices that go beyond simply getting ethical approval from research ethics boards (Tuck and Guishard, 2013; Doucet, 2018a). In particular, Indigenous communities and scholars who conduct research with them, and to a lesser extent black communities and scholars, have been calling for more attention to be paid to the nature and quality of the relationships that researchers are building with communities who have historically been oppressed in research and in society generally (Gibbs, 2001; Semali et al, 2007; Napoli, 2019). Specifically, Families, Relationships and Societies","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47947927","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321X16111601582694
Daniela Grunow, Marie Evertsson
This article ties together key findings from a 12-year cross-national qualitative collaboration that involved researchers from nine European countries. Our comparative analysis draws on longitudinal heterosexual couple data, in which both partners were interviewed first, during pregnancy, and second, between six months and two-and-a-half years after childbirth. We tackle the relational ties that shape family practices from a lifecourse perspective, emphasising the interdependent construction of motherhood and fatherhood identities, couples’ institutional embeddedness and linked lives. Analysing the data by combining the relationality and lifecourse perspectives brings forth how women and men enact agency in a constrained environment while making consequential decisions about their own, their partners’ and children’s futures. Whereas the gender culture provides parents with arguments and discourses to motivate their work-care plans, the policy context limits how new parents interact as they seek to escape or cope with institutionally prescribed gender divisions of work and care.
{"title":"Relationality and linked lives during transitions to parenthood in Europe: an analysis of institutionally framed work-care divisions","authors":"Daniela Grunow, Marie Evertsson","doi":"10.1332/204674321X16111601582694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321X16111601582694","url":null,"abstract":"This article ties together key findings from a 12-year cross-national qualitative collaboration that involved researchers from nine European countries. Our comparative analysis draws on longitudinal heterosexual couple data, in which both partners were interviewed first, during pregnancy,\u0000 and second, between six months and two-and-a-half years after childbirth. We tackle the relational ties that shape family practices from a lifecourse perspective, emphasising the interdependent construction of motherhood and fatherhood identities, couples’ institutional embeddedness\u0000 and linked lives. Analysing the data by combining the relationality and lifecourse perspectives brings forth how women and men enact agency in a constrained environment while making consequential decisions about their own, their partners’ and children’s futures. Whereas the gender\u0000 culture provides parents with arguments and discourses to motivate their work-care plans, the policy context limits how new parents interact as they seek to escape or cope with institutionally prescribed gender divisions of work and care.","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"72 1","pages":"99-118"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91135574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1332/204674320x15986394583380
K. Twamley
This article undertakes an in-depth examination into how two couples negotiate the sharing of parental leave, to understand how ‘relational resources’ may be drawn on in transforming gendered practices. The couples are selected from a longitudinal study of 42 first-time parents taking various combinations of leave. Drawing on a ‘listening guide’ approach, I analyse the interactions observed in couple interviews with a couple that shares, and another couple that does not share leave. I show that in trying to convince their partners to take leave, both women draw on gendered scripts, either in how the interaction is managed, or by the discourses that are drawn on. Moreover, fathers’ work context strongly mediates negotiations, as all participants judge this to trump other considerations regarding leave, reinforcing men’s attachment to the workplace. More research is needed to understand how these process shape divisions of paid and unpaid work in the long term.
{"title":"‘She has mellowed me into the idea of SPL’: unpacking relational resources in UK couples’ discussions of Shared Parental Leave take-up","authors":"K. Twamley","doi":"10.1332/204674320x15986394583380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674320x15986394583380","url":null,"abstract":"This article undertakes an in-depth examination into how two couples negotiate the sharing of parental leave, to understand how ‘relational resources’ may be drawn on in transforming gendered practices. The couples are selected from a longitudinal study of 42 first-time\u0000 parents taking various combinations of leave. Drawing on a ‘listening guide’ approach, I analyse the interactions observed in couple interviews with a couple that shares, and another couple that does not share leave. I show that in trying to convince their partners to take leave,\u0000 both women draw on gendered scripts, either in how the interaction is managed, or by the discourses that are drawn on. Moreover, fathers’ work context strongly mediates negotiations, as all participants judge this to trump other considerations regarding leave, reinforcing men’s\u0000 attachment to the workplace. More research is needed to understand how these process shape divisions of paid and unpaid work in the long term.","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48757791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/204674321x16322326159074
M. B. Fernández, M. Herrera
Norms of filial obligation can predict how and whether children provide support to their ageing parents. Using a nationally representative sample, this study describes the degree to which Chilean adults adhere to these norms, and analyses which variables are associated with their degree of adherence to these norms. It found that adults are more likely to adhere to these norms when their parents require special care. Using linear regression models, this study also found that younger adults and those with fewer family responsibilities are more likely to adhere to these norms, as do people who are more educated and those who identify with a religious belief. Reciprocity in parent–child relationships also predict greater adherence.
{"title":"Persistence of the norm of filial obligation among Chilean adults","authors":"M. B. Fernández, M. Herrera","doi":"10.1332/204674321x16322326159074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674321x16322326159074","url":null,"abstract":"Norms of filial obligation can predict how and whether children provide support to their ageing parents. Using a nationally representative sample, this study describes the degree to which Chilean adults adhere to these norms, and analyses which variables are associated with their degree of adherence to these norms. It found that adults are more likely to adhere to these norms when their parents require special care. Using linear regression models, this study also found that younger adults and those with fewer family responsibilities are more likely to adhere to these norms, as do people who are more educated and those who identify with a religious belief. Reciprocity in parent–child relationships also predict greater adherence.","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66312130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/204674320X16076180418172
E. Dickson
{"title":"(No) recourse to lunch: a frontline view of free school meals and immigration control during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"E. Dickson","doi":"10.1332/204674320X16076180418172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204674320X16076180418172","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p> </jats:p>","PeriodicalId":45141,"journal":{"name":"Families Relationships and Societies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66311503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：