Large accounting firms offshore a significant amount of tax work to professionals in India. Prior research suggests that individuals can have negative implicit attitudes toward people from different nationalities and that such attitudes can have undesired consequences. In this study, we measure a sample of U.S. tax professionals' implicit attitudes toward Indian persons using an Implicit Association Test (IAT) and find that participants have strong negative implicit attitudes toward Indian persons relative to U.S. persons. Nevertheless, participants do not evaluate the work of U.S. tax professionals any differently than the (identical) work of Indian tax professionals. Participants appear able to rise above their negative implicit attitudes and perform their tax work without bias in our experiment. However, it is important to acknowledge that negative implicit attitudes may result in biased behavior in contexts outside of our experiment. Data Availability: Please contact the authors.
{"title":"Implicit Attitudes and U.S. Tax Professionals’ Reliance on Offshore Tax Professionals’ Recommendations","authors":"Brian C. Spilker, Bryan W. Stewart, David A. Wood","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3667785","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3667785","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Large accounting firms offshore a significant amount of tax work to professionals in India. Prior research suggests that individuals can have negative implicit attitudes toward people from different nationalities and that such attitudes can have undesired consequences. In this study, we measure a sample of U.S. tax professionals' implicit attitudes toward Indian persons using an Implicit Association Test (IAT) and find that participants have strong negative implicit attitudes toward Indian persons relative to U.S. persons. Nevertheless, participants do not evaluate the work of U.S. tax professionals any differently than the (identical) work of Indian tax professionals. Participants appear able to rise above their negative implicit attitudes and perform their tax work without bias in our experiment. However, it is important to acknowledge that negative implicit attitudes may result in biased behavior in contexts outside of our experiment.\u0000 Data Availability: Please contact the authors.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87697004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study provides evidence on the relationship between scale characteristics and participant responses for percentage-based scales (i.e., 101 points) in accounting research. A 4×1 between-subjects experiment examines how common labeling designs affect various statistical properties, including means, variance, normality of the distribution, and frequency of responses. The results indicate that labels on percentage-based scales have a significant impact on the distribution of participants’ responses. Labeling only the endpoints is the lone condition that results in normally distributed data. Additional analyses suggest that labels on percentage-based scales influence participant responses in multiple ways. First, as the number of labels increases, participants may not adequately consider, and thus ultimately select, unlabeled points. Second, while participants seem to inherently interpret percentage-based scales in quartiles and deciles, labeling as such exacerbates this tendency. Finally, when more labels are present, participants seem to engage an anchoring heuristic when selecting their response. Taken as a whole, the results suggest that accounting researchers may benefit from labeling only the endpoints of percentage-based scales.
{"title":"Pick a Number between 0 and 100: An Examination of Percentage-Based Scales","authors":"Jared Eutsler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3665726","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3665726","url":null,"abstract":"This study provides evidence on the relationship between scale characteristics and participant responses for percentage-based scales (i.e., 101 points) in accounting research. A 4×1 between-subjects experiment examines how common labeling designs affect various statistical properties, including means, variance, normality of the distribution, and frequency of responses. The results indicate that labels on percentage-based scales have a significant impact on the distribution of participants’ responses. Labeling only the endpoints is the lone condition that results in normally distributed data. Additional analyses suggest that labels on percentage-based scales influence participant responses in multiple ways. First, as the number of labels increases, participants may not adequately consider, and thus ultimately select, unlabeled points. Second, while participants seem to inherently interpret percentage-based scales in quartiles and deciles, labeling as such exacerbates this tendency. Finally, when more labels are present, participants seem to engage an anchoring heuristic when selecting their response. Taken as a whole, the results suggest that accounting researchers may benefit from labeling only the endpoints of percentage-based scales.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81584671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Both management bias and measurement imprecision threaten the accurate reporting of complex accounting estimates, yet audit policymakers and practitioners often place a strong emphasis on bias. I examine whether directing auditors’ attention towards management bias can come at the expense of insufficient auditor sensitivity to measurement imprecision, potentially threatening overall audit quality. My primary investigation, Study 1, finds that when managers’ explicit incentives to bias financial reports are relatively weaker, an imbalanced emphasis on bias causes auditor-like participants in a stylized setting to “lower their guard” to a greater extent than when environmental factors place a more balanced emphasis on bias and imprecision. Study 2 indicates that an imbalanced emphasis on imprecision does not similarly distract auditors from bias. Study 3 utilizes a more contextually rich setting and demonstrates that an imbalanced emphasis on bias prompts even professional auditors to neglect imprecision. Accordingly, this paper suggests that a balanced emphasis on both management bias and measurement imprecision can mitigate negative consequences of auditors focusing on the former and neglecting the latter.
{"title":"Does Emphasizing Management Bias Decrease Auditors’ Sensitivity to Measurement Imprecision?","authors":"Ben W. Van Landuyt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3680716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3680716","url":null,"abstract":"Both management bias and measurement imprecision threaten the accurate reporting of complex accounting estimates, yet audit policymakers and practitioners often place a strong emphasis on bias. I examine whether directing auditors’ attention towards management bias can come at the expense of insufficient auditor sensitivity to measurement imprecision, potentially threatening overall audit quality. My primary investigation, Study 1, finds that when managers’ explicit incentives to bias financial reports are relatively weaker, an imbalanced emphasis on bias causes auditor-like participants in a stylized setting to “lower their guard” to a greater extent than when environmental factors place a more balanced emphasis on bias and imprecision. Study 2 indicates that an imbalanced emphasis on imprecision does not similarly distract auditors from bias. Study 3 utilizes a more contextually rich setting and demonstrates that an imbalanced emphasis on bias prompts even professional auditors to neglect imprecision. Accordingly, this paper suggests that a balanced emphasis on both management bias and measurement imprecision can mitigate negative consequences of auditors focusing on the former and neglecting the latter.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76844170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Badryah Alhusaini, Bradley E. Hendricks, W. Landsman
We use the introduction of the Unicorn nomenclature to reference venture-backed firms with valuations in excess of $1 billion to examine how firm categorization influences investor demand and retail trade activity during IPO price formation. We predict and find evidence to suggest that the positive appeal associated with an IPO firm’s Unicorn categorization increases IPO investor demand, as evidenced by the firm’s shares pricing above the proposed IPO pricing range and experiencing higher first-day returns relative to an entropy-matched sample of control firms. Adopting a structural-equation methodology that considers explicitly the sequence of IPO price formation, we also show that Unicorn categorization is informative for understanding retail trade activity both directly and indirectly through the mediating effects of news coverage. We also show that Unicorn categorization relates negatively to post-IPO stock performance, and that Unicorn categorization increases the sensitivity of post-IPO stock performance to pre-IPO profitability. These findings, taken together, provide evidence that categorization hides category members’ individual idiosyncrasies and causes them to assume the category’s affective tone.
{"title":"Categorization Effects in Capital Markets: Evidence From Unicorn IPOs","authors":"Badryah Alhusaini, Bradley E. Hendricks, W. Landsman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3663722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3663722","url":null,"abstract":"We use the introduction of the Unicorn nomenclature to reference venture-backed firms with valuations in excess of $1 billion to examine how firm categorization influences investor demand and retail trade activity during IPO price formation. We predict and find evidence to suggest that the positive appeal associated with an IPO firm’s Unicorn categorization increases IPO investor demand, as evidenced by the firm’s shares pricing above the proposed IPO pricing range and experiencing higher first-day returns relative to an entropy-matched sample of control firms. Adopting a structural-equation methodology that considers explicitly the sequence of IPO price formation, we also show that Unicorn categorization is informative for understanding retail trade activity both directly and indirectly through the mediating effects of news coverage. We also show that Unicorn categorization relates negatively to post-IPO stock performance, and that Unicorn categorization increases the sensitivity of post-IPO stock performance to pre-IPO profitability. These findings, taken together, provide evidence that categorization hides category members’ individual idiosyncrasies and causes them to assume the category’s affective tone.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91086346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This virtual issue traces the evolution of financial accounting and auditing experiments in the Journal of Accounting Research from early efforts in the midst of prevailing beliefs in informational market efficiency to contemporary advances from 2010 to date.
{"title":"Financial Accounting and Auditing Experiments in the Journal of Accounting Research: Historical Background and Recent Advances","authors":"Steven J. Kachelmeier","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3678868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3678868","url":null,"abstract":"This virtual issue traces the evolution of financial accounting and auditing experiments in the Journal of Accounting Research from early efforts in the midst of prevailing beliefs in informational market efficiency to contemporary advances from 2010 to date.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85414421","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mark E. Peecher, Michael A. Ricci, Yuepin (Daniel) Zhou
We introduce the construct of auditor proactivity to the accounting literature. Since auditors work in complex, dynamic environments where complete directives are often unavailable, auditors need to be proactive to achieve quality audit outcomes. However, proactivity is often lacking in practice. Thus, we position auditor proactivity as a valuable but scarce determinant of audit quality. Drawing on literature on employee proactivity, tacit knowledge, and regulatory focus theory, we identify three synergistic antecedents to a range of distinct proactive auditing behaviors. Using an experiment, we find that auditors with greater autonomy engage in more proactive behaviors, but only if they have both higher tacit knowledge and a focus on achieving positive job outcomes (rather than avoiding negative job outcomes). Our theory and findings inform academics, regulators, and practitioners about how work environments and policies could be modified to promote proactive auditing behaviors.
{"title":"Promoting Proactive Auditing Behaviors","authors":"Mark E. Peecher, Michael A. Ricci, Yuepin (Daniel) Zhou","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3636498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3636498","url":null,"abstract":"We introduce the construct of auditor proactivity to the accounting literature. Since auditors work in complex, dynamic environments where complete directives are often unavailable, auditors need to be proactive to achieve quality audit outcomes. However, proactivity is often lacking in practice. Thus, we position auditor proactivity as a valuable but scarce determinant of audit quality. Drawing on literature on employee proactivity, tacit knowledge, and regulatory focus theory, we identify three synergistic antecedents to a range of distinct proactive auditing behaviors. Using an experiment, we find that auditors with greater autonomy engage in more proactive behaviors, but only if they have both higher tacit knowledge and a focus on achieving positive job outcomes (rather than avoiding negative job outcomes). Our theory and findings inform academics, regulators, and practitioners about how work environments and policies could be modified to promote proactive auditing behaviors.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80422478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rachel M. Martin, Tyler F. Thomas, Dimitri Yatsenko
Management control systems affect employees at every level of the organizational hierarchy, so it is crucial to evaluate how controls at one hierarchical level spillover to another level. We examine how subordinates’ contract frame, an important management control, affects superiors’ target-setting decisions, another important control. Using an experiment, we predict and find that superiors set lower targets for subordinates under a penalty contract compared to a bonus contract, as superiors can project their negative perceptions of penalties onto subordinates and seek to reduce these perceived negative effects. Further, we predict and find that increasing the salience of subordinates’ contract choice to the superior mitigates the effect of subordinate contract frame on target-setting, and that these effects are stronger in low Dark Triad superiors compared to high Dark Triad superiors. Our findings add insights into the interrelationships of management controls at different hierarchical levels within the organization.
{"title":"Shielding the Workforce: Does Subordinate Contract Frame Induce Leniency in Superiors’ Target-Setting Decisions?","authors":"Rachel M. Martin, Tyler F. Thomas, Dimitri Yatsenko","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3635688","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3635688","url":null,"abstract":"Management control systems affect employees at every level of the organizational hierarchy, so it is crucial to evaluate how controls at one hierarchical level spillover to another level. We examine how subordinates’ contract frame, an important management control, affects superiors’ target-setting decisions, another important control. Using an experiment, we predict and find that superiors set lower targets for subordinates under a penalty contract compared to a bonus contract, as superiors can project their negative perceptions of penalties onto subordinates and seek to reduce these perceived negative effects. Further, we predict and find that increasing the salience of subordinates’ contract choice to the superior mitigates the effect of subordinate contract frame on target-setting, and that these effects are stronger in low Dark Triad superiors compared to high Dark Triad superiors. Our findings add insights into the interrelationships of management controls at different hierarchical levels within the organization.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84920387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Managerial overconfidence, originally disputed in terms of finance and accounting, has been dated back to Malmendier and Tate (2005a,b). Galasso and Simcoe (2011) studied the relationship between CEO overconfidence and innovation, focusing on patents, in which they found that overconfident CEO underestimates risks in R&D activities, resulting in more R&D expenditure. However, little literature concentrates on expense and capitalization of R&D expenditure in China, where new accounting rule applied since 2007, and correspondingly the relationship between overconfidence and preference of expense and capitalization. By Tobit model and GMM model, we found that overconfidence managers have incentives to capitalize on R&D expenditure, because accrual earnings management motivated by capitalized R&D, different from real earning earnings management triggered by expense R&D, which cuts down R&D expense directly to beautify the earnings performance, adjust the proportion of research and development. Therefore, such a preference to capitalize R&D turns the corporation to deal with accrual earnings management instead of real earnings management.
{"title":"Managerial Overconfidence, Research and Development, and Earnings Management: Perspective from Capitalization and Expense","authors":"Guanglei Zhou, Bingwei Chen, Yuxuan Wu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3610639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3610639","url":null,"abstract":"Managerial overconfidence, originally disputed in terms of finance and accounting, has been dated back to Malmendier and Tate (2005a,b). Galasso and Simcoe (2011) studied the relationship between CEO overconfidence and innovation, focusing on patents, in which they found that overconfident CEO underestimates risks in R&D activities, resulting in more R&D expenditure. However, little literature concentrates on expense and capitalization of R&D expenditure in China, where new accounting rule applied since 2007, and correspondingly the relationship between overconfidence and preference of expense and capitalization. By Tobit model and GMM model, we found that overconfidence managers have incentives to capitalize on R&D expenditure, because accrual earnings management motivated by capitalized R&D, different from real earning earnings management triggered by expense R&D, which cuts down R&D expense directly to beautify the earnings performance, adjust the proportion of research and development. Therefore, such a preference to capitalize R&D turns the corporation to deal with accrual earnings management instead of real earnings management.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75140873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Accounting standards require companies to recognize liabilities when a pattern of past practice creates constructive obligations. We conduct two experiments to test whether, and under what circumstances, financial statement users believe that a company’s past practice gives rise to obligations. Although we find that financial statement users rely heavily on past practice to predict a company’s future activities, they do not believe that past practice alone is sufficient to obligate a company to continue the practice. There are, however, situations in which users believe past practice does create obligations, such as when a company’s employees rely on its past practice to make important decisions. Further, users believe that such obligations can arise from moral, and not necessarily legal, compulsion. This is important because it suggests that users view obligations as comprising a broader range of situations than would be encompassed by a strict legal standard for defining obligations. Our results present a nuanced picture of the role of past practice in creating obligations and provide input to standard setters as they consider how liabilities should be defined.
{"title":"Constructive Obligations and Past Practice","authors":"S. Garavaglia, Cassie Mongold, Brian J. White","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3613216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3613216","url":null,"abstract":"Accounting standards require companies to recognize liabilities when a pattern of past practice creates constructive obligations. We conduct two experiments to test whether, and under what circumstances, financial statement users believe that a company’s past practice gives rise to obligations. Although we find that financial statement users rely heavily on past practice to predict a company’s future activities, they do not believe that past practice alone is sufficient to obligate a company to continue the practice. There are, however, situations in which users believe past practice does create obligations, such as when a company’s employees rely on its past practice to make important decisions. Further, users believe that such obligations can arise from moral, and not necessarily legal, compulsion. This is important because it suggests that users view obligations as comprising a broader range of situations than would be encompassed by a strict legal standard for defining obligations. Our results present a nuanced picture of the role of past practice in creating obligations and provide input to standard setters as they consider how liabilities should be defined.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81049418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cristina Rodriguez Vera, and C M Friend, Osazee Paul, J. Welsh, Nataraj Dasgupta
This research paper investigates whether payments made to physicians by opioid manufacturers influence their prescribing behaviour for opioid medications. The relationship has been explored primarily using payments data from CMS OpenPayments, prescribing data from Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data and county-level statistical & socio-economic data from University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. Explanation and sources of covariates have been provided in the Data Dictionary. Using Fixed Effects Panel Data Analysis (with Robust Covariance Matrix estimates), higher payments were observed to lead to higher prescription rates and therefore, the impact and consequences of the association, in light of the US Opioid Crisis, were evaluated.
{"title":"The True Cost of Prescription Opioids","authors":"Cristina Rodriguez Vera, and C M Friend, Osazee Paul, J. Welsh, Nataraj Dasgupta","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3760582","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3760582","url":null,"abstract":"This research paper investigates whether payments made to physicians by opioid manufacturers influence their prescribing behaviour for opioid medications. The relationship has been explored primarily using payments data from CMS OpenPayments, prescribing data from Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data and county-level statistical & socio-economic data from University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. Explanation and sources of covariates have been provided in the Data Dictionary. Using Fixed Effects Panel Data Analysis (with Robust Covariance Matrix estimates), higher payments were observed to lead to higher prescription rates and therefore, the impact and consequences of the association, in light of the US Opioid Crisis, were evaluated.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82512445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：