Megan L. Robbins, Pavani Jonnalagadda, Chandler M. Spahr
Though naturalistic observation methods are lauded for their utility, they are often neglected in social and personality psychology research. This paper describes evidence of the absence of naturalistic observation methods in our field, and some historical roots of this methodological imbalance in social/personality (SP) psychology. The paper then provides an overview of existing naturalistic observation methods relevant to SP psychology, describes various types of barriers to conducting such research, and concludes with recommendations for overcoming these barriers to produce a more well‐rounded science. It is time to rebalance SP psychological methods by valuing and investing in naturalistic observation research.
{"title":"Rebalancing social & personality psychology methods: The case for naturalistic observation","authors":"Megan L. Robbins, Pavani Jonnalagadda, Chandler M. Spahr","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12917","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12917","url":null,"abstract":"Though naturalistic observation methods are lauded for their utility, they are often neglected in social and personality psychology research. This paper describes evidence of the absence of naturalistic observation methods in our field, and some historical roots of this methodological imbalance in social/personality (SP) psychology. The paper then provides an overview of existing naturalistic observation methods relevant to SP psychology, describes various types of barriers to conducting such research, and concludes with recommendations for overcoming these barriers to produce a more well‐rounded science. It is time to rebalance SP psychological methods by valuing and investing in naturalistic observation research.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138513118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Social scientists are increasingly interested in studying the psychological bases of political preferences. Research at the interface of neuroscience and political psychology is uniquely positioned to test theories that link political attitudes to cognitive, affective, perceptual, and motivational processes in the brain. In this article, we review existing theories and evaluate findings from the growing field of political neuroscience with an emphasis on four brain regions that have emerged as important neural substrates of political ideology: the amygdala, the insular cortex, the anterior cingulate cortex, and the prefrontal cortex. We conclude by discussing current methodological and theoretical limitations before setting out an agenda for future research.
{"title":"The neurobiology of political ideology: Theories, findings, and future directions","authors":"Adam Panish, H. Hannah Nam","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12916","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12916","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Social scientists are increasingly interested in studying the psychological bases of political preferences. Research at the interface of neuroscience and political psychology is uniquely positioned to test theories that link political attitudes to cognitive, affective, perceptual, and motivational processes in the brain. In this article, we review existing theories and evaluate findings from the growing field of political neuroscience with an emphasis on four brain regions that have emerged as important neural substrates of political ideology: the amygdala, the insular cortex, the anterior cingulate cortex, and the prefrontal cortex. We conclude by discussing current methodological and theoretical limitations before setting out an agenda for future research.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"18 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135773685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Martin Luther King Jr. appealed for social scientists to reflect on the normative questions of what morality ought to be and what the aims of science ought to be. To avoid rendering social science irrelevant, 1960s moral psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg agreed with King when he argued that morality should be based on a philosophical ideal rather than an adjustment to society. Kohlberg's definition of morality meant that Black protesters could be exemplary. By the 1970s, Kohlberg worked in schools to promote children's knowledge of racial justice and achieve institutional reform, such as integration and affirmative action. Subsequent work challenged Kohlberg's definition of morality and instead claimed morality meant adhering to group‐defined standards. Rather than being seen as more moral and mature, Black civil rights activists came to be seen as possessing a different morality of care that refused to assimilate to White American moral norms. Later, Haidt claimed that a “great synthesis” of empirical work led to a definition of morality as adherence to cultural standards. This definition of morality led Haidt to describe the morality of Black protesters as deficient and mentally ill. The latter approach assumed science aims to achieve racial harmony and spoke against affirmative action. The change in the description of civil rights protesters as exceptional, different, and then mad results in a change in normative assumptions rather than a new synthesis of empirical findings.
{"title":"Moral psychology and civil rights protesters: Exemplary, different, and mad","authors":"Daniel W. Noon","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12915","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Martin Luther King Jr. appealed for social scientists to reflect on the normative questions of what morality ought to be and what the aims of science ought to be. To avoid rendering social science irrelevant, 1960s moral psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg agreed with King when he argued that morality should be based on a philosophical ideal rather than an adjustment to society. Kohlberg's definition of morality meant that Black protesters could be exemplary. By the 1970s, Kohlberg worked in schools to promote children's knowledge of racial justice and achieve institutional reform, such as integration and affirmative action. Subsequent work challenged Kohlberg's definition of morality and instead claimed morality meant adhering to group‐defined standards. Rather than being seen as more moral and mature, Black civil rights activists came to be seen as possessing a different morality of care that refused to assimilate to White American moral norms. Later, Haidt claimed that a “great synthesis” of empirical work led to a definition of morality as adherence to cultural standards. This definition of morality led Haidt to describe the morality of Black protesters as deficient and mentally ill. The latter approach assumed science aims to achieve racial harmony and spoke against affirmative action. The change in the description of civil rights protesters as exceptional, different, and then mad results in a change in normative assumptions rather than a new synthesis of empirical findings.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"111 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136022813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In the U.S. and other Western nations, one demographic group is most likely to downplay anthropogenic climate change and its consequences, to embrace the “discourse of delay,” and to resist pro‐environmental policies: conservative white men. In this article, we bring together critical, feminist perspectives on masculinity and environmental dominance and social psychological insights from system justification theory to hypothesize that identity‐protective cognition, material interests, and ideological legitimation processes combine and reinforce one another to motivate obstructionism when it comes to taking climate action. Our hope is that by integrating critical and empirical approaches to social science—and illuminating individual and group psychological factors that are embedded in specific historical and political settings—it will be possible to increase solidarity among environmental scholars and activists and forge a shared vision of climate justice across disciplines.
{"title":"A critical feminist system justification analysis of climate obstructionism on the part of conservative white men","authors":"Nicolette M. Dakin, Flávio Azevedo, John T. Jost","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12913","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the U.S. and other Western nations, one demographic group is most likely to downplay anthropogenic climate change and its consequences, to embrace the “discourse of delay,” and to resist pro‐environmental policies: conservative white men. In this article, we bring together critical, feminist perspectives on masculinity and environmental dominance and social psychological insights from system justification theory to hypothesize that identity‐protective cognition, material interests, and ideological legitimation processes combine and reinforce one another to motivate obstructionism when it comes to taking climate action. Our hope is that by integrating critical and empirical approaches to social science—and illuminating individual and group psychological factors that are embedded in specific historical and political settings—it will be possible to increase solidarity among environmental scholars and activists and forge a shared vision of climate justice across disciplines.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"27 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136158465","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sondra M. Stegenga, Crystal N. Steltenpohl, Hilary Lustick, Melanie S. Meyer, Rachel Renbarger, Laurel Standiford Reyes, Lindsay Ellis Lee
Abstract Open science practices are quickly being scaled up with publishers, grant‐makers, and Institutional Review Boards implementing new open policies, including requirements for increased data sharing across all types of research. Prior open science guidelines have focused mostly on issues relevant to quantitative, lab‐based, experimental research. Qualitative and other research traditions must be considered in the further development and implementation of these guidelines to ensure ethical practices in a new era where data is plentiful and being leveraged for research and other means. This article includes a discussion of why we must consider new research ethics in this era of big data and what steps can be taken to improve research practices through a systems change framework, The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
{"title":"Qualitative research at the crossroads of open science and big data: Ethical considerations","authors":"Sondra M. Stegenga, Crystal N. Steltenpohl, Hilary Lustick, Melanie S. Meyer, Rachel Renbarger, Laurel Standiford Reyes, Lindsay Ellis Lee","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12912","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Open science practices are quickly being scaled up with publishers, grant‐makers, and Institutional Review Boards implementing new open policies, including requirements for increased data sharing across all types of research. Prior open science guidelines have focused mostly on issues relevant to quantitative, lab‐based, experimental research. Qualitative and other research traditions must be considered in the further development and implementation of these guidelines to ensure ethical practices in a new era where data is plentiful and being leveraged for research and other means. This article includes a discussion of why we must consider new research ethics in this era of big data and what steps can be taken to improve research practices through a systems change framework, The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"269 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136234793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sascha Schwarz, Lisa Klümper, Markus Thomas Jansen, Maria Agthe
Abstract Violations against mitigation actions to prevent the spreading of the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus causing COVID‐19, such as not wearing a mask or not practicing social distancing, were seen as immoral and could also increase the likelihood of spreading the virus. In two studies ( N 1 = 318, N 2 = 293), we found that moral and pathogen disgust sensitivity differentially predicted perceptions of such COVID‐19 violations against mitigation actions, framed as a moral, pathogen, or on a good‐bad dimension, albeit in a less specific way than initially hypothesized (e.g., regarding the pathogenic framed violations, not only pathogen but also moral disgust was associated with higher perceptions of infectiousness). These results suggest that individual differences, especially in pathogen disgust (and, more inconsistently, moral disgust), are important when evaluating violations against mitigation actions. Further research on the role of moral disgust is needed.
{"title":"Immoral, infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID‐19 mitigation actions","authors":"Sascha Schwarz, Lisa Klümper, Markus Thomas Jansen, Maria Agthe","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12914","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12914","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Violations against mitigation actions to prevent the spreading of the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus causing COVID‐19, such as not wearing a mask or not practicing social distancing, were seen as immoral and could also increase the likelihood of spreading the virus. In two studies ( N 1 = 318, N 2 = 293), we found that moral and pathogen disgust sensitivity differentially predicted perceptions of such COVID‐19 violations against mitigation actions, framed as a moral, pathogen, or on a good‐bad dimension, albeit in a less specific way than initially hypothesized (e.g., regarding the pathogenic framed violations, not only pathogen but also moral disgust was associated with higher perceptions of infectiousness). These results suggest that individual differences, especially in pathogen disgust (and, more inconsistently, moral disgust), are important when evaluating violations against mitigation actions. Further research on the role of moral disgust is needed.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"15 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134973363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alexander Scott English, Junjie Sun, Shuhong Xu, Lu Zheng, Qionghan Zhang, Thomas Talhelm
Abstract Numerous individuals have lost loved ones during the COVID‐19 pandemic while millions of others have also experienced ongoing pervasive non‐death loss. The understanding of how people deal with non‐death loss is still relatively limited. Incorporating theory of coping and loss, this study examines the reciprocal relationship between non‐death loss and acceptance coping. Based on the results of a cross‐lagged panel model involving 314 participants in China, we found that before the end of the zero‐Covid policy, non‐death loss at Time 1 predicted less acceptance coping at Time 2, but in the opening up stage in late 2022, non‐death loss at time 2 did not predict acceptance coping at time 3. The findings have significant implications for understanding the interplay between non‐death loss and acceptance coping and highlights abrupt psychological changes during the COVID‐19 pandemic.
{"title":"COVID‐19 non‐death loss and acceptance coping: A 3‐wave cross‐lagged panel analysis","authors":"Alexander Scott English, Junjie Sun, Shuhong Xu, Lu Zheng, Qionghan Zhang, Thomas Talhelm","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12911","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12911","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Numerous individuals have lost loved ones during the COVID‐19 pandemic while millions of others have also experienced ongoing pervasive non‐death loss. The understanding of how people deal with non‐death loss is still relatively limited. Incorporating theory of coping and loss, this study examines the reciprocal relationship between non‐death loss and acceptance coping. Based on the results of a cross‐lagged panel model involving 314 participants in China, we found that before the end of the zero‐Covid policy, non‐death loss at Time 1 predicted less acceptance coping at Time 2, but in the opening up stage in late 2022, non‐death loss at time 2 did not predict acceptance coping at time 3. The findings have significant implications for understanding the interplay between non‐death loss and acceptance coping and highlights abrupt psychological changes during the COVID‐19 pandemic.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135883579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Women may experience lower rates of entry and success into certain academic and professional spaces because of their observations that their work contributions are less valued than men's. We introduce sense of mattering as a mechanism that may help explain women's underrepresentation in male‐dominated fields and leadership roles, distinguish it from related constructs, and advance a theoretical framework for how sense of mattering may shape gender disparities. Women's professional contributions are often undervalued, and women perceive and anticipate this unfair disadvantage, which may in turn limit their success, retention, and representation in stereotypically masculine spaces and roles. Attending to sense of mattering has the potential to improve upon past attempts to reduce gender disparities by emphasizing the importance of increasing the extent to which women's contributions are recognized and valued.
{"title":"Does my work matter? Reduced sense of mattering as a source of gender disparities","authors":"Ella J. Lombard, Sapna Cheryan","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12907","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Women may experience lower rates of entry and success into certain academic and professional spaces because of their observations that their work contributions are less valued than men's. We introduce sense of mattering as a mechanism that may help explain women's underrepresentation in male‐dominated fields and leadership roles, distinguish it from related constructs, and advance a theoretical framework for how sense of mattering may shape gender disparities. Women's professional contributions are often undervalued, and women perceive and anticipate this unfair disadvantage, which may in turn limit their success, retention, and representation in stereotypically masculine spaces and roles. Attending to sense of mattering has the potential to improve upon past attempts to reduce gender disparities by emphasizing the importance of increasing the extent to which women's contributions are recognized and valued.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135883451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Psychology has made tremendous strides in understanding the effects that social stimuli have on attention. However, one aspect that has received relatively less consideration is the role that attention plays in social interactions. The present review examines how attentional orienting, engagement, and communication affect and shape a diverse array of social processes, including person perception, discrimination, and group structures. Specifically, the empirical evidence reviewed here points to the notions that (1) attentional orienting mediates learning and acquisition of others' attitudes and reflects or reinforces the use of stereotypical social information; (2) attentional engagement increases the accuracy of impression formation and modulates impression valence (positive vs. negative) depending on contextual and cultural factors; (3) attentional communication conveys socially appropriate behavior depending on interpersonal factors such as familiarity, intimacy, and social status. Overall, this review reveals that the links between cognitive and social psychology are strong and bidirectional, binds that hold the potential for many new and exciting discoveries in the near future.
{"title":"The effects of visual attention on social behavior","authors":"Francesca Capozzi, Alan Kingstone","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12910","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12910","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Psychology has made tremendous strides in understanding the effects that social stimuli have on attention. However, one aspect that has received relatively less consideration is the role that attention plays in social interactions. The present review examines how attentional orienting, engagement, and communication affect and shape a diverse array of social processes, including person perception, discrimination, and group structures. Specifically, the empirical evidence reviewed here points to the notions that (1) attentional orienting mediates learning and acquisition of others' attitudes and reflects or reinforces the use of stereotypical social information; (2) attentional engagement increases the accuracy of impression formation and modulates impression valence (positive vs. negative) depending on contextual and cultural factors; (3) attentional communication conveys socially appropriate behavior depending on interpersonal factors such as familiarity, intimacy, and social status. Overall, this review reveals that the links between cognitive and social psychology are strong and bidirectional, binds that hold the potential for many new and exciting discoveries in the near future.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"183 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135884475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mayssa Rishani, Maartje E. Schouten, Inga J. Hoever
Abstract In today's organizations, employees commonly work in more than one team at a time. As this practice of multiple team membership (MTM) has become a reality of daily work, researchers across disciplines have dedicated their efforts to study its influence on valued outcomes such as employee and team effectiveness. We review the MTM literature to provide an overview of the relationship between multiteaming and effectiveness and to discuss the underlying reasons that explain why this relationship is complex and findings remain inconsistent. Drawing from teams research, we particularly highlight three sources of variance in the effects of multiteaming that have not been discussed in an integrative manner: (a) what is being studied – the aspects and nature of multiteaming; (b) how multiteaming is thought to affect effectiveness – the processes through which multiteaming transforms into (in)effectiveness; and (c) who are the multiteamers – the characteristics of multiteamers. Our review thus offers a more fine‐grained theoretical understanding of multiteaming's influence on effectiveness and uncovers exciting future research directions.
{"title":"Navigating multiple team membership: A review and redirection of its influence on effectiveness outcomes","authors":"Mayssa Rishani, Maartje E. Schouten, Inga J. Hoever","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12899","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In today's organizations, employees commonly work in more than one team at a time. As this practice of multiple team membership (MTM) has become a reality of daily work, researchers across disciplines have dedicated their efforts to study its influence on valued outcomes such as employee and team effectiveness. We review the MTM literature to provide an overview of the relationship between multiteaming and effectiveness and to discuss the underlying reasons that explain why this relationship is complex and findings remain inconsistent. Drawing from teams research, we particularly highlight three sources of variance in the effects of multiteaming that have not been discussed in an integrative manner: (a) what is being studied – the aspects and nature of multiteaming; (b) how multiteaming is thought to affect effectiveness – the processes through which multiteaming transforms into (in)effectiveness; and (c) who are the multiteamers – the characteristics of multiteamers. Our review thus offers a more fine‐grained theoretical understanding of multiteaming's influence on effectiveness and uncovers exciting future research directions.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136013285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","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：