This study aims to examine the factors that influence the intensity of personal taxpayer behavior using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), namely performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, attitude toward using technology, self-efficacy, and anxiety. The research model was analyzed using a Structural quation Model (SEM) based on variants with SmartPLS 2.0. The test results state that only the condition of the facilities and attitudes towards technology have a significant effect, while others have an influence but are not significant. This means that personal taxpayers in Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi consider the condition of facilities such as tools, guidelines, knowledge, and attitudes towards technology that can affect the intensity of using the e-filing system in reporting Taxes.
{"title":"Intensity of Taxpayers Using E-Filing (Empirical Testing of Taxpayers in Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi)","authors":"Annisa Hakim Zamzami, Y. Putra","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3493951","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3493951","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to examine the factors that influence the intensity of personal taxpayer behavior using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), namely performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, attitude toward using technology, self-efficacy, and anxiety. The research model was analyzed using a Structural quation Model (SEM) based on variants with SmartPLS 2.0. The test results state that only the condition of the facilities and attitudes towards technology have a significant effect, while others have an influence but are not significant. This means that personal taxpayers in Jakarta, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi consider the condition of facilities such as tools, guidelines, knowledge, and attitudes towards technology that can affect the intensity of using the e-filing system in reporting Taxes.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84885845","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}
Brant E. Christensen, Nathan J. Newton, Michael S. Wilkins
Using U.S. data from a global accounting firm, we investigate whether two key elements of audit teams – team workloads and staffing continuity – affect audit outcomes. We find that greater team workloads are associated with lower audit quality, particularly when team members spend more time on other concurrent clients, have lower performance ratings, and have total workloads that exceed the common industry benchmark. This detrimental effect is especially observable for senior and staff auditors. We also find that greater year-over-year team staffing continuity improves audit quality, efficiency, and profitability. These effects are strongest when senior and staff auditor continuity is high, when returning team members are highly rated, and in smaller audit offices where quality typically is lowest. Our study provides important new evidence about audit teams and audit outcomes as called for by academics and audit regulators.
{"title":"How Do Team Workloads and Team Staffing Affect the Audit? Archival Evidence from U.S. Audits","authors":"Brant E. Christensen, Nathan J. Newton, Michael S. Wilkins","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3418533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3418533","url":null,"abstract":"Using U.S. data from a global accounting firm, we investigate whether two key elements of audit teams – team workloads and staffing continuity – affect audit outcomes. We find that greater team workloads are associated with lower audit quality, particularly when team members spend more time on other concurrent clients, have lower performance ratings, and have total workloads that exceed the common industry benchmark. This detrimental effect is especially observable for senior and staff auditors. We also find that greater year-over-year team staffing continuity improves audit quality, efficiency, and profitability. These effects are strongest when senior and staff auditor continuity is high, when returning team members are highly rated, and in smaller audit offices where quality typically is lowest. Our study provides important new evidence about audit teams and audit outcomes as called for by academics and audit regulators.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91440993","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 article examines the effect of institutional investors’ investment horizons on firms’ innovation activities. We conjecture that the presence of long-term institutional investors mitigates managerial myopia, prompting firms to generate greater corporate innovation outputs. Using data on patents and patent citations for US firms, we find that institutions’ investment horizons are positively related to the number of patents and patent citations. We also document that long-term (short-term) institutional ownership is positively (negatively) related to the innovation outputs. This article makes an additional contribution to the corporate innovation literature by addressing the positive role of long-term institutional investors.
{"title":"Do Long‐Term Institutional Investors Foster Corporate Innovation?","authors":"Hyun-Dong Kim, Kwangwoo Park, Kyojik Roy Song","doi":"10.1111/acfi.12284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12284","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the effect of institutional investors’ investment horizons on firms’ innovation activities. We conjecture that the presence of long-term institutional investors mitigates managerial myopia, prompting firms to generate greater corporate innovation outputs. Using data on patents and patent citations for US firms, we find that institutions’ investment horizons are positively related to the number of patents and patent citations. We also document that long-term (short-term) institutional ownership is positively (negatively) related to the innovation outputs. This article makes an additional contribution to the corporate innovation literature by addressing the positive role of long-term institutional investors.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90118328","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}
We present new theory and experimental findings indicating that investors ascribe value to firms that use higher financial-reporting quality (FRQ), controlling for the influence of higher FRQ on their estimates of these firms’ fundamental value. To guide our investigation, we draw on the cooperation literature in accounting, finance and psychology. We identify expanded audit reports, particularly auditor commentary, as a mechanism that credibly communicates whether a firm uses higher FRQ. Auditor commentary increases investors’ willingness to pay (WTP) more to own shares of a firm using higher FRQ than a competing firm using lower FRQ. We also provide process evidence that investors perceive higher FRQ as cooperative behavior by measuring their affective responses and cognitive beliefs, which mediate the influence of audit commentary on investors’ increased WTP for higher FRQ. A second experiment bolsters the link between investors’ affective and cognitive responses to a firm’s FRQ and perceived cooperative behavior. Overall, we contribute to the accounting literature by motivating a reinterpretation of studies on value relevance and mispricing. We also provide theory and evidence that there is greater value in expanded audit reports than previously understood, and this value likely has standard-setting and audit-pricing implications.
{"title":"Do Investors Value Higher Financial-Reporting Quality, and Can Expanded Audit Reports Unlock This Value?","authors":"W. B. Elliott, Kirsten Fanning, Mark E. Peecher","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3136066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3136066","url":null,"abstract":"We present new theory and experimental findings indicating that investors ascribe value to firms that use higher financial-reporting quality (FRQ), controlling for the influence of higher FRQ on their estimates of these firms’ fundamental value. To guide our investigation, we draw on the cooperation literature in accounting, finance and psychology. We identify expanded audit reports, particularly auditor commentary, as a mechanism that credibly communicates whether a firm uses higher FRQ. Auditor commentary increases investors’ willingness to pay (WTP) more to own shares of a firm using higher FRQ than a competing firm using lower FRQ. We also provide process evidence that investors perceive higher FRQ as cooperative behavior by measuring their affective responses and cognitive beliefs, which mediate the influence of audit commentary on investors’ increased WTP for higher FRQ. A second experiment bolsters the link between investors’ affective and cognitive responses to a firm’s FRQ and perceived cooperative behavior. Overall, we contribute to the accounting literature by motivating a reinterpretation of studies on value relevance and mispricing. We also provide theory and evidence that there is greater value in expanded audit reports than previously understood, and this value likely has standard-setting and audit-pricing implications.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91531130","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}
We experimentally examine the effects of trait professional skepticism on fraud brainstorming performance. We find that groups with a minority, but not a majority, of high trait skeptics assess fraud risk higher than control groups with no high trait skeptics. These effects persist to group members’ individual, post-brainstorming fraud risk assessments, indicating conversion to the minority (skeptical) viewpoint. Mediation analyses indicate that groups with a minority of high trait skeptics assess higher fraud risk in part because they consider more fraud ideas. Groups with a minority of high trait skeptics tend to view the minority high trait skeptic as the best member of the group because of that member’s unique insights. Our study contributes to the brainstorming literature by demonstrating that the mix of trait professional skeptics in the group impacts brainstorming outcomes. It casts doubt on prevailing wisdom that superior audit outcomes require a majority of high trait skeptics.
{"title":"Fraud Brainstorming Group Composition: The Persuasive Power of a Skeptical Minority","authors":"M. McAllister, Allen D. Blay, Kathryn Kadous","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3105566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3105566","url":null,"abstract":"We experimentally examine the effects of trait professional skepticism on fraud brainstorming performance. We find that groups with a minority, but not a majority, of high trait skeptics assess fraud risk higher than control groups with no high trait skeptics. These effects persist to group members’ individual, post-brainstorming fraud risk assessments, indicating conversion to the minority (skeptical) viewpoint. Mediation analyses indicate that groups with a minority of high trait skeptics assess higher fraud risk in part because they consider more fraud ideas. Groups with a minority of high trait skeptics tend to view the minority high trait skeptic as the best member of the group because of that member’s unique insights. Our study contributes to the brainstorming literature by demonstrating that the mix of trait professional skeptics in the group impacts brainstorming outcomes. It casts doubt on prevailing wisdom that superior audit outcomes require a majority of high trait skeptics.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81381297","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}
Ashley A. Austin, Jacqueline S. Hammersley, Michael A. Ricci
Auditors must assess the reasonableness of management’s estimates and have difficulty evaluating the assumptions underlying these estimates. One source of these problems is that auditors appear to dismiss evidence that contradicts management’s assumptions, due to their initial preference to support management’s accounting. We experimentally examine whether focusing auditors on documenting evidence inconsistent with their preferred conclusion reduces their dismissiveness of evidence that contradicts management’s assumptions. We find that preference-inconsistent auditors prepare documentation that is overall less dismissive of key evidence that contradicts management’s biased estimate and that they document more inferences that contradict, rather than support, management’s assumptions. Importantly, preference-inconsistent auditors do not increase their documentation of contradicting facts, indicating that a preference-inconsistent documentation focus affects how auditors interpret contradicting evidence rather than merely increasing their attention to this evidence. These documentation effects persist to improve auditors’ evaluations of the biased estimate. Thus, focusing auditors on documenting evidence inconsistent with their preferred conclusion improves audit quality in an important and difficult area.
{"title":"Improving Auditors’ Consideration of Evidence Contradicting Management's Estimate Assumptions","authors":"Ashley A. Austin, Jacqueline S. Hammersley, Michael A. Ricci","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2808178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2808178","url":null,"abstract":"Auditors must assess the reasonableness of management’s estimates and have difficulty evaluating the assumptions underlying these estimates. One source of these problems is that auditors appear to dismiss evidence that contradicts management’s assumptions, due to their initial preference to support management’s accounting. We experimentally examine whether focusing auditors on documenting evidence inconsistent with their preferred conclusion reduces their dismissiveness of evidence that contradicts management’s assumptions. We find that preference-inconsistent auditors prepare documentation that is overall less dismissive of key evidence that contradicts management’s biased estimate and that they document more inferences that contradict, rather than support, management’s assumptions. Importantly, preference-inconsistent auditors do not increase their documentation of contradicting facts, indicating that a preference-inconsistent documentation focus affects how auditors interpret contradicting evidence rather than merely increasing their attention to this evidence. These documentation effects persist to improve auditors’ evaluations of the biased estimate. Thus, focusing auditors on documenting evidence inconsistent with their preferred conclusion improves audit quality in an important and difficult area.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86970497","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}
Ryan D. Sommerfeldt, Aaron F. Zimbelman, Mark F. Zimbelman
Auditors’ honesty and skepticism are crucial to their effectiveness as enablers of trust in capital markets. Regulators have recently expressed concerns that audit culture does not sufficiently strengthen these attributes. We overcome significant obstacles to investigate the influence of audit culture on auditor honesty and skepticism. In our experiment, practicing auditors and non-auditor accountants take part in two economic tasks with economic incentives that allow us to unobtrusively measure honesty and skepticism. Drawing on prior research, we measure the influence of audit culture by manipulating the salience of participants’ occupational identity. We find evidence that audit culture increases skepticism but decreases honesty. We do not observe a similar effect for non-auditor accountants, suggesting our auditor findings are not driven by broader firm- or profession-wide influences.
{"title":"The Effect of Audit Culture on Auditor Honesty and Skepticism","authors":"Ryan D. Sommerfeldt, Aaron F. Zimbelman, Mark F. Zimbelman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3304188","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3304188","url":null,"abstract":"Auditors’ honesty and skepticism are crucial to their effectiveness as enablers of trust in capital markets. Regulators have recently expressed concerns that audit culture does not sufficiently strengthen these attributes. We overcome significant obstacles to investigate the influence of audit culture on auditor honesty and skepticism. In our experiment, practicing auditors and non-auditor accountants take part in two economic tasks with economic incentives that allow us to unobtrusively measure honesty and skepticism. Drawing on prior research, we measure the influence of audit culture by manipulating the salience of participants’ occupational identity. We find evidence that audit culture increases skepticism but decreases honesty. We do not observe a similar effect for non-auditor accountants, suggesting our auditor findings are not driven by broader firm- or profession-wide influences.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81559323","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}
Firms are increasingly disseminating images on social media that display customized earnings measures (“non-GAAP images”). This practice falls outside the scope of mandatory disclosure rules on non-GAAP prominence in earnings releases and SEC filings. Using an experiment, we isolate this unexplored regulatory gap and investigate how non-GAAP images disseminated on social media and text-based prominence in hyperlinked earnings releases interact to influence investors’ reliance on non-GAAP earnings. Results indicate that, when the firm tweets an image featuring non-GAAP earnings, investors rely more on non-GAAP earnings even when GAAP earnings is prominent in a hyperlinked earnings release. Thus, a non-GAAP image tweet overrides the prominent placement of GAAP earnings in the earnings release. However, no such overriding effect occurs when non-GAAP earnings is tweeted in a plain text format. Supplemental experiments confirm that images operate as a distinctive prominence tool that differentially influences investors compared to traditional text-based prominence.
{"title":"Gaming Regulation with Image-Based Tweets","authors":"Nerissa C. Brown, W. B. Elliott, S. Grant","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3080994","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3080994","url":null,"abstract":"Firms are increasingly disseminating images on social media that display customized earnings measures (“non-GAAP images”). This practice falls outside the scope of mandatory disclosure rules on non-GAAP prominence in earnings releases and SEC filings. Using an experiment, we isolate this unexplored regulatory gap and investigate how non-GAAP images disseminated on social media and text-based prominence in hyperlinked earnings releases interact to influence investors’ reliance on non-GAAP earnings. Results indicate that, when the firm tweets an image featuring non-GAAP earnings, investors rely more on non-GAAP earnings even when GAAP earnings is prominent in a hyperlinked earnings release. Thus, a non-GAAP image tweet overrides the prominent placement of GAAP earnings in the earnings release. However, no such overriding effect occurs when non-GAAP earnings is tweeted in a plain text format. Supplemental experiments confirm that images operate as a distinctive prominence tool that differentially influences investors compared to traditional text-based prominence.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88785194","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 paper reviews the pitching template proposed by Faff (). The article highlights the usefulness of this template for researchers. It is observed that there is scope for adapting this tool, with a template suitable for qualitative researchers being proposed. In the light of the various methodological differences through different research paradigms, it is envisaged that this adaptation will assist in bridging the schism between qualitative and quantitative research. It is also hoped that the proposed enhanced template will encourage qualitative researchers to submit to mainstream accounting journals and quantitative researchers to comprehend the value of qualitative research.
{"title":"What About Your Qualitative Cousins? Adapting the Pitching Template to Qualitative Research","authors":"Sumit K. Lodhia","doi":"10.1111/acfi.12266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12266","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reviews the pitching template proposed by Faff (). The article highlights the usefulness of this template for researchers. It is observed that there is scope for adapting this tool, with a template suitable for qualitative researchers being proposed. In the light of the various methodological differences through different research paradigms, it is envisaged that this adaptation will assist in bridging the schism between qualitative and quantitative research. It is also hoped that the proposed enhanced template will encourage qualitative researchers to submit to mainstream accounting journals and quantitative researchers to comprehend the value of qualitative research.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89061896","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}
Michael S. Drake, P. Joos, Joseph Pacelli, Brady J. Twedt
Changing economic conditions over the past two decades have created incentives for sell-side analysts to both provide their institutional clients tiered services and to streamline their written research process. One manifestation of these changes is an increased likelihood of analysts’ issuing earnings forecasts for multiple firms on the same day. We identify this bundling property and show that bundling has increased steadily over time. We provide field evidence that the practice is a cost-saving measure, a natural by-product of analysts focusing on thematic research, and a reflection of forecast updating that occurs in advance of important events. Our empirical analyses show that bundled forecasts are less accurate, less bold, and less informative to investors than nonbundled forecasts. We also find that analysts who produce bundled forecasts provide valuable specialized services to their institutional clients. Our findings ultimately demonstrate that forecast bundling has important implications for the properties of analysts’ forecasts.This paper was accepted by Shiva Rajgopal, accounting.
{"title":"Analyst Forecast Bundling","authors":"Michael S. Drake, P. Joos, Joseph Pacelli, Brady J. Twedt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2924695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2924695","url":null,"abstract":"Changing economic conditions over the past two decades have created incentives for sell-side analysts to both provide their institutional clients tiered services and to streamline their written research process. One manifestation of these changes is an increased likelihood of analysts’ issuing earnings forecasts for multiple firms on the same day. We identify this bundling property and show that bundling has increased steadily over time. We provide field evidence that the practice is a cost-saving measure, a natural by-product of analysts focusing on thematic research, and a reflection of forecast updating that occurs in advance of important events. Our empirical analyses show that bundled forecasts are less accurate, less bold, and less informative to investors than nonbundled forecasts. We also find that analysts who produce bundled forecasts provide valuable specialized services to their institutional clients. Our findings ultimately demonstrate that forecast bundling has important implications for the properties of analysts’ forecasts.This paper was accepted by Shiva Rajgopal, accounting.","PeriodicalId":8737,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Accounting eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77970317","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：