Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ERP Study of Liberals’ and Conservatives’ Moral Reasoning Processes: Evidence from South Korea

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Do liberals’ and conservatives’ brain processes differ in moral reasoning? This research explains these groups’ dissimilar moral stances when they face ethical transgressions in business. Research that explores the effects of ideological asymmetry on moral reasoning processes through moral foundations (i.e., fairness and authority) has been limited. We hypothesize two different moral reasoning processes and test them in the South Korean culture. Study 1 uses the neuroscientific method of event-related potentials (ERP) to explore the dissociable neural mechanisms that underlie Korean liberals’ and conservatives’ moral reasoning processes in business ethical transgressions. Liberals’ early frontal negative-going (EFN) brain waves showed that they are quick to pass negative judgment by intuitively detecting violations of fairness (i.e., moral engagement), while conservatives’ temporoparietal positive-going (TPP) brain waves showed that they have a higher motivation to respect authority (i.e., moral rationalization). Both liberals’ and conservatives’ ERP components occur within the first second of the decision-making phase, suggesting the rapid and intuitive nature of moral reasoning processes. Study 2 tests a mediating process and confirms that Korean liberals (conservatives) exhibit the moral engagement (rationalization) strategy, through the fairness (authority) foundation. These findings from our interdisciplinary research deepen the knowledge of the complexity of human morality in business ethics research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While the term “moral rationalization” traditionally implies a class of moral reasoning strategies, we define it as a moral reasoning process by conservatives that arises because of intuitive responses to violations of authority. Such responses by both liberals and conservatives occur within the first second of decision-making.

References

  • Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., Master, S. L., & Yee, C. M. (2007). Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism. Nature Neuroscience, 10(10), 1246–1247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arli, D., Septianto, F., & Chowdhury, R. M. (2020). Religious but not ethical: The effects of extrinsic religiosity, ethnocentrism and self-righteousness on consumers’ ethical judgments. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04414-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2010). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartikowski, B., Fastoso, F., & Gierl, H. (2020). How nationalistic appeals affect foreign luxury brand reputation: A study of ambivalent effects. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, A., Berman, J. Z., & Reed, A., II. (2013). Tip of the hat, wag of the finger: How moral decoupling enables consumers to admire and admonish. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(6), 1167–1184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, A., Berman, J. Z., & Reed, A. (2015). Global character and motivated moral decouplingamong liberals and conservatives. In K. Diehl & C. Yoon (Eds.), Advances in consumer research North American advances, 43 (pp. 23–27). Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boksem, M. A., & De Cremer, D. (2010). Fairness concerns predict medial frontal negativity amplitude in ultimatum bargaining. Social Neuroscience, 5(1), 118–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, E. Y., & Ilicic, J. (2019). Political ideology and brand attachment. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 36, 630–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, R. M. M. I. (2019). The moral foundations of consumer ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(3), 585–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, C. L., Jost, J. T., Castellanos, F. X., Milham, M. P., Kelly, C., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2012, April). Individual differences in political orientation are reflected in the intrinsic functional organization of the human brain. Poster presented at the 5th Annual Meeting of the Social and Affective Neuroscience Society, New York, NY.

  • Cushman, F. (2013). Action, outcome, and value: A dual-system framework for morality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(3), 273–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decety, J., & Cacioppo, S. (2012). The speed of morality: A high-density electrical neuroimaging study. Journal of Neurophysiology, 108(11), 3068–3072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deppe, K. D., Gonzalez, F. J., Neiman, J., Pahlke, J., Smith, K., & Hibbing, J. R. (2015). Reflective liberals and intuitive conservatives: A look at the Cognitive Reflection Test and ideology. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(4), 314–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. S. B. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, M., Wehling, E., Chung, J. M., Saslow, L. R., & Melvær Paulin, I. (2020). Measuring moral politics: How strict and nurturant family values explain individual differences in conservatism, liberalism, and the political middle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(4), 777–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24(1), 56–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, J. H., & Schreiber, D. (2008). Biology, politics, and the emerging science of human nature. Science, 322(5903), 912–914.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gable, P. A., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2010). Late positive potential to appetitive stimuli and local attentional bias. Emotion, 10(3), 441.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-de-Frutos, N., Ortega-Egea, J. M., & Martínez-del-Río, J. (2018). Anti-consumption for environmental sustainability: Conceptualization, review, and multilevel research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(2), 411–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehring, W. J., & Willoughby, A. R. (2002). The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses. Science, 295(5563), 2279–2282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Herrero, G., De Clercq, W., Anwar, H., Kara, O., Egiazarian, K., Van Huffel, S., et al. (2006). Automatic removal of ocular artifacts in the EEG without an EOG reference channel. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Signal Processing Symposium, NORSIG 2006, Reykjavik.

  • Graham, J., Englander, Z., Morris, J., Hawkins, C. B., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2012). Warning bell: Liberals implicitly respond to group morality before rejecting it explicitly. Available at SSRN 2071499.

  • Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. D., & Haidt, J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(12), 517–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gui, D. Y., Gan, T., & Liu, C. (2016). Neural evidence for moral intuition and the temporal dynamics of interactions between emotional processes and moral cognition. Social Neuroscience, 11(4), 380–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haberstroh, K., Orth, U. R., Hoffmann, S., & Brunk, B. (2017). Consumer response to unethical corporate behavior: A re-examination and extension of the moral decoupling model. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(1), 161–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316(5827), 998–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2004). Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus, 133(4), 55–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, K., Jung, J., Mittal, V., Zyung, J. D., & Adam, H. (2019). Political identity and financial risk taking: Insights from social dominance orientation. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 581–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, T. C. (2005). Event-related potentials: A methods handbook. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harenski, C. L., Antonenko, O., Shane, M. S., & Kiehl, K. A. (2010). A functional imaging investigation of moral deliberation and moral intuition. NeuroImage, 49(3), 2707–2716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janoff-Bulman, R. (2009). To provide or protect: Motivational bases of political liberalism and conservatism. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 120–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Baldacci, K. G. (2008). Mapping moral motives: Approach, avoidance, and political orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1091–1099.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joel, S., Burton, C. M., & Plaks, J. E. (2014). Conservatives anticipate and experience stronger emotional reactions to negative outcomes. Journal of Personality, 82(1), 32–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Amodio, D. M. (2012). Political ideology as motivated social cognition: Behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36(1), 55–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Hannah, H. N., Amodio, D. M., & van Bavel, J. J. (2014). Political neuroscience: The beginning of a beautiful friendship. Political Psychology, 35, 3–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Langer, M., Badaan, V., Azevedo, F., Etchezahar, E., Ungaretti, J., & Hennes, E. P. (2017b). Ideology and the limits of self-interest: System justification motivation and conservative advantages in mass politics. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3(3), e1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Langer, M., & Singh, V. (2017a). The politics of buying, boycotting, complaining, and disputing: An extension of the research program by Jung, Garbarino, Briley, and Wynhausen. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(3), 503–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, K., Garbarino, E., Briley, D. A., & Wynhausen, J. (2017). Blue and red voices: Effects of political ideology on consumers’ complaining and disputing behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(3), 477–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D. M. (2012). Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection: An experimental study. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 407–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanai, R., Feilden, T., Firth, C., & Rees, G. (2011). Political orientations are correlated with brain structure in young adults. Current Biology, 21(8), 677–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1785/1959). Foundation of the metaphysics of morals. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

  • Kashmiri, S., & Mahajan, V. (2017). Values that shape marketing decisions: Influence of chief executive officers’ political ideologies on innovation propensity, shareholder value, and risk. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(2), 260–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, R., Misra, K., & Singh, V. (2013). Ideology and brand consumption. Psychological Science, 24(3), 326–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, B., Farmer, A., & Hardesty, D. M. (2013). Getting liberals and conservatives to go green: Political ideology and congruent appeals. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(2), 350–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. C., Brian, P., & Dubois, D. (2018). How consumers’ political ideology and status-maintenance goals interact to shape their desire for luxury goods. Journal of Marketing, 82(6), 132–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. R., & Kang, J. S. (2013). Liberal–conservative self-identification in Korea: A cross-cultural explanation. Korean Social Science Journal, 40(2), 113–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. R., Kang, J. S., & Yun, S. (2012). Moral intuitions and political orientation: Similarities and differences between South Korea and the United States. Psychological Reports, 111(1), 173–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and Sequence: The cognitive–developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koster-Hale, J., Saxe, R., Dungan, J., & Young, L. L. (2013). Decoding moral judgments from neural representations of intentions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(14), 5648–5653.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. J., Kwon, G., Shin, H. J., Yang, S., Lee, S., & Suh, M. (2014). The spell of green: Can frontal EEG activations identify green consumers? Journal of Business Ethics, 122(3), 511–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S. (1998). Utilitarianism (pp. 3–4). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, J., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Eslinger, P. J., Bramati, I. E., Mourão-Miranda, J., Andreiuolo, P. A., & Pessoa, L. (2002). The neural correlates of moral sensitivity: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of basic and moral emotions. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(7), 2730–2736.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mühlberger, A., Wieser, M. J., Herrmann, M. J., Weyers, P., Tröger, C., & Pauli, P. (2009). Early cortical processing of natural and artificial emotional faces differs between lower and higher socially anxious persons. Journal of Neural Transmission, 116(6), 735–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K., & Garavan, H. (2004). An empirical investigation into the number of subjects required for an event-related fMRI study. NeuroImage, 22(2), 879–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman-Norlund, R., Burch, J., & Becofsky, K. (2013). Human Mirror Neuron System (hMNS) specific differences in resting-state functional connectivity in self-reported Democrats and Republicans: A pilot study. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 3, 341–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijssen, E. J., & Douglas, S. P. (2004). Examining the animosity model in a country with a high level of foreign trade. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(1), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordabayeva, N., & Fernandes, D. (2018). Better or different? How political ideology shapes preferences for differentiation in the social hierarchy. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(2), 227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyserman, D., & Schwarz, N. (2017). Conservatism as a situated identity: Implications for consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(4), 532–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Marqui, R. D. (2002). Standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA): Technical details. Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, 24(Suppl D), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrini, K., Piwek, L., Crabbe, F., Pollick, F. E., & Garrod, S. (2014). Look at those two!: The precuneus role in unattended third-person perspective of social interactions. Human Brain Mapping, 35(10), 5190–5203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pletti, C., Decety, J., & Paulus, M. (2019). Moral identity relates to the neural processing of third-party moral behavior. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 14(4), 435–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pozharliev, R., Verbeke, W. J., Van Strien, J. W., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2015). Merely being with you increases my attention to luxury products: Using EEG to understand consumers’ emotional experience with luxury branded products. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(4), 546–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, D. M., & Fernandes, M. F. (1991). The social desirability response bias in ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(11), 805–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. C., Voegtlin, C., & Maak, T. (2017). Business ethics: The promise of neuroscience. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(4), 679–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarlo, M., Lotto, L., Manfrinati, A., Rumiati, R., Gallicchio, G., & Palomba, D. (2012). Temporal dynamics of cognitive–emotional interplay in moral decision-making. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 1018–1029.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: The role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of mind.” NeuroImage, 19(4), 1835–1842.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz, J., Scheel, C. N., Rigon, A., Gross, J. J., & Blechert, J. (2012). You don’t like me, do you? Enhanced ERP responses to averted eye gaze in social anxiety. Biological Psychology, 91(2), 263–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, D. (2017). Neuropolitics: Twenty years later. Politics and the Life Sciences, 36(2), 114–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber, D., Fonzo, G., Simmons, A. N., Dawes, C. T., Flagan, T., Fowler, J. H., & Paulus, M. P. (2013). Red brain, blue brain: Evaluative processes differ in Democrats and Republicans. PLoS ONE, 8(2), e52970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Settle, J. E., Dawes, C. T., Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2010). Friendships moderate an association between a dopamine gene variant and political ideology. The Journal of Politics, 72(4), 1189–1198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenhav, A., & Greene, J. D. (2014). Integrative moral judgment: Dissociating the roles of the amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(13), 4741–4749.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. B., Alford, J. R., Hibbing, J. R., Martin, N. G., & Hatemi, P. K. (2017). Intuitive ethics and political orientations: Testing moral foundations as a theory of political ideology. American Journal of Political Science, 61(2), 424–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, S. J., Sinnott-Armstrong, W., & Huettel, S. A. (2017). Neuromarketing: Ethical implications of its use and potential misuse. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(4), 799–811.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Korea Herald. (2017, April 17). [Election 2017] A look into presidential campaign posters. Retrieved December 29, 2020 from http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20170417000557.

  • The Korea Times. (2017, December 11). Unfair hiring at public firms. Retrieved October 15, 2020 from http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/opinion/2017/12/202_240742.html.

  • The Korea Herald. (2020, July 01). Fairness matters. Retrieved July 16, 2020 from http://www01.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200630000620.

  • Theodoridis, A. G., & Amy, J. N. (2012). Of BOLD claims and excessive fears: A call for caution and patience regarding political neuroscience. Political Psychology, 33, 27–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, M. (2006). Human brands: Investigating antecedents to consumers’ strong attachments to celebrities. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 104–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldman, D. A., Wang, D., Hannah, S. T., & Balthazard, P. A. (2017). A neurological and ideological perspective of ethical leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1285–1306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, G., Li, J., Li, Z., Wei, M., & Li, S. (2016). Medial frontal negativity reflects advantageous inequality aversion of proposers in the ultimatum game: An ERP study. Brain Research, 1639, 38–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yılmaz, O., & Sarıbay, S. A. (2017). The relationship between cognitive style and political orientation depends on the measures used. Judgment and Decision Making, 12(2), 140–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoder, K. J., & Decety, J. (2014). Spatiotemporal neural dynamics of moral judgment: A high-density ERP study. Neuropsychologia, 60, 39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S., Shim, M., Kim, H. S., & Lee, S.-H. (2016). Enhanced early posterior negativity to fearful faces in patients with anxiety disorder. Brain Topography, 29(2), 262–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, L., Cushman, F., Hauser, M., & Saxe, R. (2007). The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(20), 8235–8240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Li, S. (2015). Two measures for cross-cultural research on morality: Comparison and revision. Psychological Reports, 117(1), 144–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X., Lynch, J. J., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering mediation: Tests, claims and implications for theory building. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by a grant from the NRF (National Research Foundation of Korea) (2018R1A2B6004658) given to E-JL and a Global Ph.D. Fellowship (2015H1A2A1031721) given to JHY.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, Business School, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, 03063, Korea

    Jin Ho Yun & Eun-Ju Lee

  2. Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, Sejong University, Seoul, 05006, Korea

    Yaeri Kim

  3. Department of Digital Marketing, School of Management, Sejong Cyber University, Seoul, 05006, Korea

    Yaeri Kim

  4. Neuro Intelligence Center, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, 03063, Korea

    Eun-Ju Lee

Authors
  1. Jin Ho Yun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yaeri Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eun-Ju Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eun-Ju Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board (IRB) of Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, South Korea.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yun, J.H., Kim, Y. & Lee, EJ. ERP Study of Liberals’ and Conservatives’ Moral Reasoning Processes: Evidence from South Korea. J Bus Ethics 176, 723–739 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04734-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04734-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation