Pub Date : 2026-02-07DOI: 10.1177/00220027261417327
Hankyeul Yang
Military alliances are an important feature of major power competition. One way for a major power to increase its relative power is to drive a wedge in a rival’s alliance. Why and when does a major power do so? I propose a theory of strategic opportunity, which holds that a major power seeks to drive a wedge in the rival’s alliance by offering economic aid to a rival’s protégé when that country experiences a rapid deterioration in its relations with its patron. I test my theory on major power rivalry dyads and find empirical support for my argument on a set of directed dyad-year observations between 1960 and 2010. The findings contribute to our understanding of alliance politics and strategic considerations behind using economic carrots in major power rivalry.
{"title":"Major Power Rivalry and Wedge Strategy of Concessions","authors":"Hankyeul Yang","doi":"10.1177/00220027261417327","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027261417327","url":null,"abstract":"Military alliances are an important feature of major power competition. One way for a major power to increase its relative power is to drive a wedge in a rival’s alliance. Why and when does a major power do so? I propose a theory of strategic opportunity, which holds that a major power seeks to drive a wedge in the rival’s alliance by offering economic aid to a rival’s protégé when that country experiences a rapid deterioration in its relations with its patron. I test my theory on major power rivalry dyads and find empirical support for my argument on a set of directed dyad-year observations between 1960 and 2010. The findings contribute to our understanding of alliance politics and strategic considerations behind using economic carrots in major power rivalry.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146138273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-07DOI: 10.1177/00220027261421160
Kyle Atwell, David C. Logan
How do nuclear weapons affect interstate conflict? Empirical studies on this question have returned mixed results. We argue that these results are due to overlooking indirect conflicts, a distinct and prominent form of limited conflict. Expanding current datasets to account for both conflict intensity and directness provides new insights about interstate conflict. We investigate the relationship between nuclear weapons and conflict through a large-n analysis that includes a new indicator for indirect conflict. We find that state dyads which possess nuclear weapons are significantly more likely to engage in indirect conflict. The results suggest the importance of including measures of indirect conflict in future scholarship and the need for policymakers to prepare for increased instances of indirect conflict between major powers possessing nuclear weapons.
{"title":"Shadow Wars in the Shadow of the Bomb: The Link Between Nuclear Weapons and Indirect Conflict","authors":"Kyle Atwell, David C. Logan","doi":"10.1177/00220027261421160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027261421160","url":null,"abstract":"How do nuclear weapons affect interstate conflict? Empirical studies on this question have returned mixed results. We argue that these results are due to overlooking indirect conflicts, a distinct and prominent form of limited conflict. Expanding current datasets to account for both conflict intensity and directness provides new insights about interstate conflict. We investigate the relationship between nuclear weapons and conflict through a large-n analysis that includes a new indicator for indirect conflict. We find that state dyads which possess nuclear weapons are significantly more likely to engage in indirect conflict. The results suggest the importance of including measures of indirect conflict in future scholarship and the need for policymakers to prepare for increased instances of indirect conflict between major powers possessing nuclear weapons.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"132 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146138272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-30DOI: 10.1177/00220027261421124
Joshua Alley, Layla Picard, Philip B. K. Potter
How do Americans view militant right-wing extremist organizations? We address this question using identical survey instruments that combine endorsement experiments and direct questions fielded in 2020 and 2022. Our design builds on established methodologies used to study attitudes toward militant organizations abroad. We find that consumption of right-wing media is strongly associated with less negative views of militant right-wing groups. We also document that public opinion toward these organizations became less negative over time, though the magnitude of this shift varies across groups.
{"title":"Attitudes Towards Extremist Organizations in the United States","authors":"Joshua Alley, Layla Picard, Philip B. K. Potter","doi":"10.1177/00220027261421124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027261421124","url":null,"abstract":"How do Americans view militant right-wing extremist organizations? We address this question using identical survey instruments that combine endorsement experiments and direct questions fielded in 2020 and 2022. Our design builds on established methodologies used to study attitudes toward militant organizations abroad. We find that consumption of right-wing media is strongly associated with less negative views of militant right-wing groups. We also document that public opinion toward these organizations became less negative over time, though the magnitude of this shift varies across groups.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146089857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1177/00220027231214996
Nicholas Emery-Xu, Andrew Park, Robert Trager
A formal model reveals how the information environment affects international races to implement a powerful, dangerous new military technology, which may cause a “disaster” affecting all states. States implementing the technology face a tradeoff between the safety of the technology and performance in the race. States face unknown, private, and public information about capabilities. More decisive races, in which small performance leads produce larger probabilities of victory, are usually more dangerous. In addition, revealing information about rivals’ capabilities has two opposing effects on risk: states discover either that they are far apart in capability and compete less or that they are close in capability and drastically reduce safety to win. Therefore, the public information scenario is less risky than the private information scenario except under high decisiveness. Finally, regardless of information, the larger the eventual loser’s impact on safety relative to the eventual winner’s, the more dangerous is the race.
{"title":"Uncertainty, Information, and Risk in International Technology Races","authors":"Nicholas Emery-Xu, Andrew Park, Robert Trager","doi":"10.1177/00220027231214996","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027231214996","url":null,"abstract":"A formal model reveals how the information environment affects international races to implement a powerful, dangerous new military technology, which may cause a “disaster” affecting all states. States implementing the technology face a tradeoff between the safety of the technology and performance in the race. States face unknown, private, and public information about capabilities. More decisive races, in which small performance leads produce larger probabilities of victory, are usually more dangerous. In addition, revealing information about rivals’ capabilities has two opposing effects on risk: states discover either that they are far apart in capability and compete less or that they are close in capability and drastically reduce safety to win. Therefore, the public information scenario is less risky than the private information scenario except under high decisiveness. Finally, regardless of information, the larger the eventual loser’s impact on safety relative to the eventual winner’s, the more dangerous is the race.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145903651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1177/00220027251407077
Regine Schwab, Werner Krause, Samer Massoud
Does targeting civilians suppress or intensify insurgent violence? Existing research presents contradictory findings, focusing primarily on direct civilian targeting. We examine how government attacks on civilian infrastructure – specifically medical facilities – affect rebel behavior. We argue that hospital bombings trigger rebel escalation through civilian pressure and reputation-seeking. Analyzing novel data on hospital attacks in northwestern Syria (2017-2020), we use matching methods combined with difference-in-differences estimation to assess effects on combat intensity. Distinguishing between rebel- and government-initiated fighting, we find that hospital attacks increase insurgent violence within one week. Interviews with medical workers, activists, and rebels confirm that hospital bombings intensify attacks through our hypothesized mechanisms. These findings demonstrate that infrastructure targeting backfires strategically, echoing broader evidence on punishment strategies’ limitations in counterinsurgency. Our results also highlight concerns about the erosion of legal norms protecting medical facilities and civilians in armed conflict.
{"title":"The Bombing of Hospitals and Rebel Responses in Civil War. Evidence from Syria","authors":"Regine Schwab, Werner Krause, Samer Massoud","doi":"10.1177/00220027251407077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251407077","url":null,"abstract":"Does targeting civilians suppress or intensify insurgent violence? Existing research presents contradictory findings, focusing primarily on direct civilian targeting. We examine how government attacks on civilian infrastructure – specifically medical facilities – affect rebel behavior. We argue that hospital bombings trigger rebel escalation through civilian pressure and reputation-seeking. Analyzing novel data on hospital attacks in northwestern Syria (2017-2020), we use matching methods combined with difference-in-differences estimation to assess effects on combat intensity. Distinguishing between rebel- and government-initiated fighting, we find that hospital attacks increase insurgent violence within one week. Interviews with medical workers, activists, and rebels confirm that hospital bombings intensify attacks through our hypothesized mechanisms. These findings demonstrate that infrastructure targeting backfires strategically, echoing broader evidence on punishment strategies’ limitations in counterinsurgency. Our results also highlight concerns about the erosion of legal norms protecting medical facilities and civilians in armed conflict.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145836062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-26DOI: 10.1177/00220027251410091
Md Muhibbur Rahman, Nazmus Sakib
Do acts of military insubordination affect foreign aggression? We argue that mutiny makes a state more vulnerable to international coercion. Mutinies help foreign adversaries differentiate weak targets from strong ones by “affecting” and “revealing” states’ war-fighting costs and resolve. They disrupt the military command structure, thereby increasing the costs of organizing a well-coordinated defense against foreign threats. They also make deterrence posturing less effective by signaling a weakened resolve that sets the stage for the mutiny. Using time-series-cross-sectional data from 1945 to 2014, we show that mutiny (a) increases the likelihood of the state being targeted in a militarized interstate dispute, and (b) decreases the likelihood of its resistance once the MID is initiated. The paper advances our understanding of how civil-military relations affect states’ external threat environment. It also underscores the dynamic role of private information in international conflict processes.
{"title":"Military Insubordination and International Coercion","authors":"Md Muhibbur Rahman, Nazmus Sakib","doi":"10.1177/00220027251410091","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251410091","url":null,"abstract":"Do acts of military insubordination affect foreign aggression? We argue that mutiny makes a state more vulnerable to international coercion. Mutinies help foreign adversaries differentiate weak targets from strong ones by “affecting” and “revealing” states’ war-fighting costs and resolve. They disrupt the military command structure, thereby increasing the costs of organizing a well-coordinated defense against foreign threats. They also make deterrence posturing less effective by signaling a weakened resolve that sets the stage for the mutiny. Using time-series-cross-sectional data from 1945 to 2014, we show that mutiny (a) increases the likelihood of the state being targeted in a militarized interstate dispute, and (b) decreases the likelihood of its resistance once the MID is initiated. The paper advances our understanding of how civil-military relations affect states’ external threat environment. It also underscores the dynamic role of private information in international conflict processes.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145836061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-23DOI: 10.1177/00220027251409402
Souleymane Yameogo, Anja Neundorf
How does chronic terrorism affect support for democracy in fragile states? While most research examines isolated attacks in stable democracies, little is known about persistent violence in insecure, weakly institutionalised contexts. This paper addresses that gap by analysing Africa, where terrorism is widespread and democratic transitions remain incomplete. Using Afrobarometer survey data matched with terrorism events, we employ an entropy balancing strategy within an unexpected-event-during-survey (UESD) design to estimate causal effects. We find that terrorism consistently undermines democratic support – especially in countries with stronger liberal institutions and lower development. Younger and older citizens are particularly susceptible to attitudinal shifts. These findings highlight how terrorism’s political impact hinges not just on exposure, but also on broader structural vulnerabilities shaped by institutions, development, and demography. The study advances theories of authoritarian reflex and threat perception, offering new insights into sustaining democracy amid chronic insecurity.
{"title":"The Impact of Terrorism on Democratic Support in Africa","authors":"Souleymane Yameogo, Anja Neundorf","doi":"10.1177/00220027251409402","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251409402","url":null,"abstract":"How does chronic terrorism affect support for democracy in fragile states? While most research examines isolated attacks in stable democracies, little is known about persistent violence in insecure, weakly institutionalised contexts. This paper addresses that gap by analysing Africa, where terrorism is widespread and democratic transitions remain incomplete. Using Afrobarometer survey data matched with terrorism events, we employ an entropy balancing strategy within an unexpected-event-during-survey (UESD) design to estimate causal effects. We find that terrorism consistently undermines democratic support – especially in countries with stronger liberal institutions and lower development. Younger and older citizens are particularly susceptible to attitudinal shifts. These findings highlight how terrorism’s political impact hinges not just on exposure, but also on broader structural vulnerabilities shaped by institutions, development, and demography. The study advances theories of authoritarian reflex and threat perception, offering new insights into sustaining democracy amid chronic insecurity.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"587 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145808067","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-06DOI: 10.1177/00220027251406634
Tobias Böhmelt
Peace agreements increasingly contain environmental provisions, yet we know little about the impact these clauses might have. This study is the first to systematically assess whether and how environmental terms in peace treaties can influence states’ climate policies. I argue that peace accords help establish the foundations for legalization and the rule of law in post-conflict societies, which facilitates that environmental terms lead to actual legislation. I analyze over 2,000 peace agreements and thousands of climate mitigation policies from 1990 to 2024, using multiple estimation strategies. The findings show that peace agreements’ environmental provisions are associated with the adoption of climate policies in post-conflict periods. This relationship holds even when exploring environmental outcomes, accounting for countries’ self-selection into environmental terms, or considering moderating factors like institutional capacity. The study contributes to the literature on peacebuilding and environmental politics, offering new insights into how peace agreements can shape post-conflict settings.
{"title":"How Peace Treaties Can Influence Countries’ Climate Policies","authors":"Tobias Böhmelt","doi":"10.1177/00220027251406634","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251406634","url":null,"abstract":"Peace agreements increasingly contain environmental provisions, yet we know little about the impact these clauses might have. This study is the first to systematically assess whether and how environmental terms in peace treaties can influence states’ climate policies. I argue that peace accords help establish the foundations for legalization and the rule of law in post-conflict societies, which facilitates that environmental terms lead to actual legislation. I analyze over 2,000 peace agreements and thousands of climate mitigation policies from 1990 to 2024, using multiple estimation strategies. The findings show that peace agreements’ environmental provisions are associated with the adoption of climate policies in post-conflict periods. This relationship holds even when exploring environmental outcomes, accounting for countries’ self-selection into environmental terms, or considering moderating factors like institutional capacity. The study contributes to the literature on peacebuilding and environmental politics, offering new insights into how peace agreements can shape post-conflict settings.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145680298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-05DOI: 10.1177/00220027251399905
Christopher Blair, Paul Lendway, Joshua A. Schwartz
Politicians frequently use historical analogies to justify their preferred foreign policies. However, despite their prevalence, it remains unclear whether, how, and why they shape public opinion. We conduct the most comprehensive experimental test to date of the impact of historical analogies on the U.S. public’s foreign policy preferences and find compelling evidence that analogical appeals increase mass confidence in leaders’ foreign policy decisionmaking. We also illustrate several of the key mechanisms underlying this dynamic and show that historical analogies are more effective at shaping public opinion than (arguably) less rational presidential justifications like “gut” or intuition. Finally, we demonstrate that analogical reasoning is no more effective at moving public opinion than other types of rational justifications leaders use, such as appeals to experts, and that these other communication strategies impact public opinion through similar mechanisms as analogies. This suggests analogies are just one of many potentially effective devices in leaders’ broader rhetorical toolkits. Our results reveal the logic and limitations of an important elite communication strategy in foreign policymaking, and contribute to the growing literature on foreign policy attitudes and political communication.
{"title":"Historical Analogies and Public Support for Foreign Policy Action","authors":"Christopher Blair, Paul Lendway, Joshua A. Schwartz","doi":"10.1177/00220027251399905","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251399905","url":null,"abstract":"Politicians frequently use historical analogies to justify their preferred foreign policies. However, despite their prevalence, it remains unclear whether, how, and why they shape public opinion. We conduct the most comprehensive experimental test to date of the impact of historical analogies on the U.S. public’s foreign policy preferences and find compelling evidence that analogical appeals increase mass confidence in leaders’ foreign policy decisionmaking. We also illustrate several of the key mechanisms underlying this dynamic and show that historical analogies are more effective at shaping public opinion than (arguably) less rational presidential justifications like “gut” or intuition. Finally, we demonstrate that analogical reasoning is no more effective at moving public opinion than other types of rational justifications leaders use, such as appeals to experts, and that these other communication strategies impact public opinion through similar mechanisms as analogies. This suggests analogies are just one of many potentially effective devices in leaders’ broader rhetorical toolkits. Our results reveal the logic and limitations of an important elite communication strategy in foreign policymaking, and contribute to the growing literature on foreign policy attitudes and political communication.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"250 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145680336","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-11-24DOI: 10.1177/00220027251398483
Gerald Eisenkopf, Torben Kölpin
A large literature in psychology and economics suggests that enrolment into groups shapes conflict behavior, even if the groups lack a salient identity. Our experimental design systematically modifies group formation and prize sharing rules to explain behavioral differences between conflicts among individuals and intergroup feuds. Apart from rather high levels of conflict expenditure in all treatments, we find no specific evidence for outgroup hostility. Group formation induces conditional cooperation within the groups. The prize distribution rules have a strong aggregate impact. Proportional prize sharing in winning groups fosters expenditure while egalitarian prize-sharing – a staple of such experiments – induces the predicted free-rider effects. Overall, our results support inequality aversion rather than parochial altruism as an explanation for differences in expenditures between individual and group conflicts.
{"title":"Group Enrolment and Conflict Behavior","authors":"Gerald Eisenkopf, Torben Kölpin","doi":"10.1177/00220027251398483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251398483","url":null,"abstract":"A large literature in psychology and economics suggests that enrolment into groups shapes conflict behavior, even if the groups lack a salient identity. Our experimental design systematically modifies group formation and prize sharing rules to explain behavioral differences between conflicts among individuals and intergroup feuds. Apart from rather high levels of conflict expenditure in all treatments, we find no specific evidence for outgroup hostility. Group formation induces conditional cooperation within the groups. The prize distribution rules have a strong aggregate impact. Proportional prize sharing in winning groups fosters expenditure while egalitarian prize-sharing – a staple of such experiments – induces the predicted free-rider effects. Overall, our results support inequality aversion rather than parochial altruism as an explanation for differences in expenditures between individual and group conflicts.","PeriodicalId":51363,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Conflict Resolution","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145583042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：