Pub Date : 2023-12-23DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220646
Albert H. Fang, Adam Thal
Democracy requires voters to hold politicians accountable for violating democratic norms. Events surrounding Donald Trump have shown how partisanship can interfere with this process. While Trump has been accused of violating democratic norms, Republicans have opposed efforts to hold him accountable. Using a survey experiment, we explore the conditions under which Republican voters might become more willing to hold Trump accountable for violating democratic norms. We focus on whether Republicans can be convinced by members of their own party that Trump should be held accountable. Our research thus speaks to whether Republican voters might be receptive to appeals from Republican elites like Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney who have criticized Trump. We find more evidence than prior work that Republicans are receptive to appeals from co-partisans who are critical of Trump’s behavior. However, our overall finding is that co-partisan appeals are not highly effective at changing Republicans’ views of Trump.
{"title":"When Do Voters Punish Politicians Who Violate Democratic Norms?","authors":"Albert H. Fang, Adam Thal","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220646","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220646","url":null,"abstract":"Democracy requires voters to hold politicians accountable for violating democratic norms. Events surrounding Donald Trump have shown how partisanship can interfere with this process. While Trump has been accused of violating democratic norms, Republicans have opposed efforts to hold him accountable. Using a survey experiment, we explore the conditions under which Republican voters might become more willing to hold Trump accountable for violating democratic norms. We focus on whether Republicans can be convinced by members of their own party that Trump should be held accountable. Our research thus speaks to whether Republican voters might be receptive to appeals from Republican elites like Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney who have criticized Trump. We find more evidence than prior work that Republicans are receptive to appeals from co-partisans who are critical of Trump’s behavior. However, our overall finding is that co-partisan appeals are not highly effective at changing Republicans’ views of Trump.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139161511","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 : 2023-12-17DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220921
Sean Freeder, Enrijeta Shino
Recent partisan claims about the illegitimacy of the 2020 election highlight a need to better understand the determinants underlying Americans' trust in the electoral process. In this study, we focus on African Americans and conservatives, two groups that stand out both historically and contemporaneously for high levels of distrust in elections. Utilizing nationally representative survey data, we analyze the degree to which election distrust is associated with respondents’ attitudes towards policies addressing voter access (photo ID requirements, vote by-mail, and felon voting), perceptions of disenfranchisement, and their personal experience while voting. We find evidence that distrust is not tied to one’s personal voting experience, but rather to one’s policy attitudes towards electoral access. Importantly, for conservative and Black voters, the policy remedies that would lead to increased trust for one group would only further exacerbate the concerns of the other, suggesting that distrust towards American elections will be difficult to attenuate.
{"title":"Access or Experience? Determinants of Distrust in US Elections","authors":"Sean Freeder, Enrijeta Shino","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220921","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220921","url":null,"abstract":"Recent partisan claims about the illegitimacy of the 2020 election highlight a need to better understand the determinants underlying Americans' trust in the electoral process. In this study, we focus on African Americans and conservatives, two groups that stand out both historically and contemporaneously for high levels of distrust in elections. Utilizing nationally representative survey data, we analyze the degree to which election distrust is associated with respondents’ attitudes towards policies addressing voter access (photo ID requirements, vote by-mail, and felon voting), perceptions of disenfranchisement, and their personal experience while voting. We find evidence that distrust is not tied to one’s personal voting experience, but rather to one’s policy attitudes towards electoral access. Importantly, for conservative and Black voters, the policy remedies that would lead to increased trust for one group would only further exacerbate the concerns of the other, suggesting that distrust towards American elections will be difficult to attenuate.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138966601","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 : 2023-12-15DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220640
Lindsey Cormack
Examining the impacts of ranked choice voting (RCV) on voter efficacy is important as more areas consider adoption. The greater number of choices provided by longer RCV ballots may introduce opportunities for voters to misunderstand the ballot, make errant marks, or accidentally mark two or more candidates for one ranking, resulting in voidable ballots due to “overvoting.” Using ballot data from the 2013 general election, the 2017, and 2021 New York City democratic mayoral primaries, this paper asks whether voidable overvote ballots are more concentrated in constituencies with lower levels of educational attainment, average household incomes, and differing racial make-ups, and if this relationship is more pronounced under RCV than traditional elections. In the first RCV election in 2021, voters in locations with lower levels of educational attainment and median household incomes had higher shares of overvote voidable ballots than those in locations with higher educational attainment and incomes.
{"title":"More Choices, More Problems? Ranked Choice Voting Errors in New York City","authors":"Lindsey Cormack","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220640","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220640","url":null,"abstract":"Examining the impacts of ranked choice voting (RCV) on voter efficacy is important as more areas consider adoption. The greater number of choices provided by longer RCV ballots may introduce opportunities for voters to misunderstand the ballot, make errant marks, or accidentally mark two or more candidates for one ranking, resulting in voidable ballots due to “overvoting.” Using ballot data from the 2013 general election, the 2017, and 2021 New York City democratic mayoral primaries, this paper asks whether voidable overvote ballots are more concentrated in constituencies with lower levels of educational attainment, average household incomes, and differing racial make-ups, and if this relationship is more pronounced under RCV than traditional elections. In the first RCV election in 2021, voters in locations with lower levels of educational attainment and median household incomes had higher shares of overvote voidable ballots than those in locations with higher educational attainment and incomes.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138997421","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 : 2023-12-14DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220650
Kim Fridkin, Trudy Horsting, Anastasia L. Brown, Alexandra M. Williams
We explore how political and psychological factors condition the effectiveness of PSAs promoting COVID-19 vaccines. Targeting college students, we utilize a pretest-posttest experiment to examine how different PSAs (emotional, informational, and humorous) influence students’ emotional reactions and assessments of the PSAs. Further, we assess whether the PSAs are able to influence learning and persuasion. We find certain PSAs are more effective at changing people’s attitudes about the COVID-19 vaccine and the impact of these messages depends on people’s political and psychological predispositions. The informational PSA produces learning, regardless of students’ receptivity to pro-vaccine messaging. However, the humorous and emotional PSAs encourages learning only for those who are already receptive to the vaccine. These findings have implications for future public health campaigns aimed at college students, suggesting PSA campaigns developed to battle new health crises should be launched quickly before people develop strong attitudes about the emerging crisis.
{"title":"How College Students React to COVID Vaccine PSAs: An Experimental Investigation","authors":"Kim Fridkin, Trudy Horsting, Anastasia L. Brown, Alexandra M. Williams","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220650","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220650","url":null,"abstract":"We explore how political and psychological factors condition the effectiveness of PSAs promoting COVID-19 vaccines. Targeting college students, we utilize a pretest-posttest experiment to examine how different PSAs (emotional, informational, and humorous) influence students’ emotional reactions and assessments of the PSAs. Further, we assess whether the PSAs are able to influence learning and persuasion. We find certain PSAs are more effective at changing people’s attitudes about the COVID-19 vaccine and the impact of these messages depends on people’s political and psychological predispositions. The informational PSA produces learning, regardless of students’ receptivity to pro-vaccine messaging. However, the humorous and emotional PSAs encourages learning only for those who are already receptive to the vaccine. These findings have implications for future public health campaigns aimed at college students, suggesting PSA campaigns developed to battle new health crises should be launched quickly before people develop strong attitudes about the emerging crisis.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139002190","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 : 2023-12-11DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231221987
Timothy Frye
How do citizens respond to extreme violations of democratic institutions, such as the January 6th, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol? Using an online survey of 900 employed respondents conducted January 5–9, 2021, I find that those interviewed just hours after the insurrection were about 10% points less likely to identify as Republicans, reported greater dislike for Donald Trump, and expressed less attachment to conservatism even controlling for prior levels of party identification. Self-reported Trump voters interviewed after the insurrection were also less likely to identify as Republican and expressed a less favorable view of Donald Trump. The findings only reflect the short-term reactions of employed respondents but are robust to alternative specifications and the very narrow temporal window of the analyses helps to isolate the impact of the insurrection. These results offer evidence in the on-going debate over how to interpret the events of January 6th, 2021.
{"title":"Do Violations of Democratic Norms Change Political Attitudes? Evidence From the January 6th Insurrection","authors":"Timothy Frye","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231221987","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231221987","url":null,"abstract":"How do citizens respond to extreme violations of democratic institutions, such as the January 6th, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol? Using an online survey of 900 employed respondents conducted January 5–9, 2021, I find that those interviewed just hours after the insurrection were about 10% points less likely to identify as Republicans, reported greater dislike for Donald Trump, and expressed less attachment to conservatism even controlling for prior levels of party identification. Self-reported Trump voters interviewed after the insurrection were also less likely to identify as Republican and expressed a less favorable view of Donald Trump. The findings only reflect the short-term reactions of employed respondents but are robust to alternative specifications and the very narrow temporal window of the analyses helps to isolate the impact of the insurrection. These results offer evidence in the on-going debate over how to interpret the events of January 6th, 2021.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138979742","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 : 2023-12-11DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220653
Grant Ferguson, Kathryn Haglin, Soren Jordan
Investing in cryptocurrency has become more popular among Americans. Despite this, politicians and social scientists know almost nothing about the politics of cryptocurrency in the American public. By analyzing an original, nationally representative survey of 2500 American respondents, we create the first robust profile of the personalities, demographics, and political attitudes of cryptocurrency owners. We show that Americans who report hardship from inflation are more likely to own cryptocurrency, suggesting that when inflation is high, Americans may be more likely to use cryptocurrency as a medium of exchange and store of value. Americans who favor lower government spending and are more inclined toward conspiratorial thinking are also more likely to own cryptocurrency. Finally, there is a personality to cryptocurrency owners, with those open to new experiences more likely to own it and the conscientious less likely to own it. Our results have implications for how the American public may use cryptocurrency going forward.
{"title":"The Personality and Politics of Cryptocurrency Investors","authors":"Grant Ferguson, Kathryn Haglin, Soren Jordan","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220653","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220653","url":null,"abstract":"Investing in cryptocurrency has become more popular among Americans. Despite this, politicians and social scientists know almost nothing about the politics of cryptocurrency in the American public. By analyzing an original, nationally representative survey of 2500 American respondents, we create the first robust profile of the personalities, demographics, and political attitudes of cryptocurrency owners. We show that Americans who report hardship from inflation are more likely to own cryptocurrency, suggesting that when inflation is high, Americans may be more likely to use cryptocurrency as a medium of exchange and store of value. Americans who favor lower government spending and are more inclined toward conspiratorial thinking are also more likely to own cryptocurrency. Finally, there is a personality to cryptocurrency owners, with those open to new experiences more likely to own it and the conscientious less likely to own it. Our results have implications for how the American public may use cryptocurrency going forward.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138981885","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 : 2023-12-11DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220648
Rebekah Herrick, Sue Thomas
Using an original dataset, we offer an intersectional exploration of psychological violence, threats, and physical violence against U.S. mayors in 2021 in cities of 10,000+ in population. We also explore violence that is gendered and raced. Overall, we find significant and meaningful differences among gender/race groups. Women of color and non-Hispanic white women faced higher rates of threats, gendered, and sexualized violence than men, and women of color were the only mayors to report heightened levels of gendered and raced violence. Non-Hispanic white women mayors were distinctive in that they reported higher levels of psychological violence, including being criticized for their appearance and perceptions that they were too emotional, but were least likely to be called sexist. These findings suggest that there are race- and gender-based costs of holding office. If so, the effects on democratic representation and the benefits from representational diversity will be forfeited.
{"title":"An Intersectional Exploration of Psychological Violence, Threats, and Physical Violence of Mayors in 2021","authors":"Rebekah Herrick, Sue Thomas","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220648","url":null,"abstract":"Using an original dataset, we offer an intersectional exploration of psychological violence, threats, and physical violence against U.S. mayors in 2021 in cities of 10,000+ in population. We also explore violence that is gendered and raced. Overall, we find significant and meaningful differences among gender/race groups. Women of color and non-Hispanic white women faced higher rates of threats, gendered, and sexualized violence than men, and women of color were the only mayors to report heightened levels of gendered and raced violence. Non-Hispanic white women mayors were distinctive in that they reported higher levels of psychological violence, including being criticized for their appearance and perceptions that they were too emotional, but were least likely to be called sexist. These findings suggest that there are race- and gender-based costs of holding office. If so, the effects on democratic representation and the benefits from representational diversity will be forfeited.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139010124","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 : 2023-12-07DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220642
Kristina M. LaPlant, Keith E. Lee, J. LaPlant
As our nation struggles to make sense of the pathologies of conspiracy thinking and hyper-polarization in our body politics, this study investigates why some members of the House GOP caucus used Twitter to promote conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election. Our study first examines the predictors of conspiracy theory tweeting, and second, whether this messaging was related to voting for or against the certification of presidential election results in Arizona and Pennsylvania on January 6th. Our results suggest President Trump’s election performance in 2020, conspiratorial tweeting, and freshman status of House members were the driving factors of voting behavior on January 6th.
{"title":"Stopping the Steal and Selling the Big Lie: An Analysis of Tweets and Certification Votes Among House Republicans in the Wake of the 2020 Presidential Election","authors":"Kristina M. LaPlant, Keith E. Lee, J. LaPlant","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220642","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220642","url":null,"abstract":"As our nation struggles to make sense of the pathologies of conspiracy thinking and hyper-polarization in our body politics, this study investigates why some members of the House GOP caucus used Twitter to promote conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 election. Our study first examines the predictors of conspiracy theory tweeting, and second, whether this messaging was related to voting for or against the certification of presidential election results in Arizona and Pennsylvania on January 6th. Our results suggest President Trump’s election performance in 2020, conspiratorial tweeting, and freshman status of House members were the driving factors of voting behavior on January 6th.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138590575","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 : 2023-12-07DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220639
Nicholas Jacobs, Wasike Gil Imboywa
This article explores the trend of increasing nationalization in American politics and its effect on the U.S. Senate's federalizing dynamics, using campaign finance as an indicator. We analyze the geographic distribution of campaign contributions to U.S. Senate races from 1984 to 2020, tracing the nationalization of donor behavior in America. Key findings suggest that more ideologically conservative senators and those running for their first election are likely to rely heavily on out-of-state donations, with regional differences also evident. We argue that the nationalization of campaign finance challenges the Senate's representative structure and hints at another dimension of inequality in American politics—geographical versus national influence. This study offers no definitive normative argument but posits restricting out-of-state donations as a potential solution to address the growing inequality in the voting power of Senate members.
{"title":"The Nationalization of Individual Campaign Contributions in U.S. Senate Elections, 1984-2020","authors":"Nicholas Jacobs, Wasike Gil Imboywa","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220639","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the trend of increasing nationalization in American politics and its effect on the U.S. Senate's federalizing dynamics, using campaign finance as an indicator. We analyze the geographic distribution of campaign contributions to U.S. Senate races from 1984 to 2020, tracing the nationalization of donor behavior in America. Key findings suggest that more ideologically conservative senators and those running for their first election are likely to rely heavily on out-of-state donations, with regional differences also evident. We argue that the nationalization of campaign finance challenges the Senate's representative structure and hints at another dimension of inequality in American politics—geographical versus national influence. This study offers no definitive normative argument but posits restricting out-of-state donations as a potential solution to address the growing inequality in the voting power of Senate members.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138590388","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 : 2023-12-07DOI: 10.1177/1532673x231220645
EmiLee Smart
Does increased use of the shadow docket influence public opinion of the Supreme Court? In recent years, the shadow docket of the Supreme Court has been used with increased frequency to make important decisions. The little research done previously on this docket has led to speculation that the shadow docket creates potential problems with perceptions of legitimacy for the Court. I theorize that procedures matter in changing public opinion of an institution when the procedures are nontransparent, stray from expected norms, and are thus perceived as politically unfair. I administered a survey experiment and find evidence to suggest that use of the shadow docket procedure does lead to less support for decisions as well as an increased support for measures of broad court curbing. The results have important implications for approval of the Court as well as the role of the Court in a transparent democracy.
{"title":"A Shadow’s Influence? How the Shadow Docket Influences Public Opinion","authors":"EmiLee Smart","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220645","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220645","url":null,"abstract":"Does increased use of the shadow docket influence public opinion of the Supreme Court? In recent years, the shadow docket of the Supreme Court has been used with increased frequency to make important decisions. The little research done previously on this docket has led to speculation that the shadow docket creates potential problems with perceptions of legitimacy for the Court. I theorize that procedures matter in changing public opinion of an institution when the procedures are nontransparent, stray from expected norms, and are thus perceived as politically unfair. I administered a survey experiment and find evidence to suggest that use of the shadow docket procedure does lead to less support for decisions as well as an increased support for measures of broad court curbing. The results have important implications for approval of the Court as well as the role of the Court in a transparent democracy.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138592721","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：