Advertisement

Chinese character handwriting: A large-scale behavioral study and a database

  • Ruiming WangEmail author
  • Shuting Huang
  • Yacong Zhou
  • Zhenguang G. CaiEmail author
Article

Abstract

We report on a psycholinguistic database of Chinese character handwriting based on a large-scale study that involved 203 participants, each handwriting 200 characters randomly sampled from a cohort of 1,600 characters. Apart from collecting writing latencies, durations, and accuracy, we also compiled 14 lexical variables for each character. Regressions showed that frequency, age of acquisition, and the word context (in which a character appears) are all-around and influential predictors of orthographic access (as reflected in writing latency), motor execution of handwriting (as reflected in writing duration), and accuracy. In addition, phonological factors (phonogram status, spelling regularity, and homophone density) impacted orthographic access but not handwriting execution. Semantic factors (imageability and concreteness) only affected accuracy. These results suggest, among other things, that phonology is consulted in orthographic access while handwriting. As the first of its kind, this database can be used as a source of secondary data analyses and a tool for stimulus construction in handwriting research.

Keywords

Handwriting Chinese Database Lexicon Phonology Orthography 

Notes

Author note

This work was supported by the Guangdong Province Universities and Colleges Pearl River Younger Scholar Funded Scheme (2016), a Project of the Key Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, MOE (17JJD190001), and the Economic and Social Research Council (L010224/2). We thank Gabriella Vigliocco for discussion of the work, and Hua Shu for communication on character age of acquisition.

Supplementary material

13428_2019_1206_MOESM1_ESM.txt (196 kb)
ESM 1 (TXT 195 kb)
13428_2019_1206_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (406 kb)
ESM 2 (XLSX 406 kb)
13428_2019_1206_MOESM3_ESM.txt (2 kb)
ESM 3 (TXT 1 kb)

References

  1. Afonso, O., & Álvarez, C. J. (2011). Phonological effects in handwriting production: Evidence from the implicit priming paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1474–1483.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024515 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283–316.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balota, D. A., & Ferraro, F. R. (1993). A dissociation of frequency and regularity effects in pronunciation performance across young-adults, older adults, and individuals with senile dementia of the Alzheimer-type. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 573–592.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., ... Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193014
  5. Barca, L., Burani, C., & Arduino, L. S. (2002). Word naming times and psycholinguistic norms for Italian nouns. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 424–434.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195471 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter, D. M., & Warrington, E. K. (1986). Ideational agraphia: A single case study. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 49, 369–374.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.49.4.369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bloemsaat, G., Van Galen, G. P., & Meulenbroek, R. G. (2003). Lateralized effects of orthographical irregularity and auditory memory load on the kinematics of transcription typewriting. Psychological Research, 67, 123–133.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-002-0112-7 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonin, P., Fayol, M., & Chalard, M. (2001). Age of acquisition and word frequency in written picture naming. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 469–489.  https://doi.org/10.1080/713755968 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonin, P., Méot, A., & Bugaiska, A. (2018). Concreteness norms for 1,659 French words: Relationships with other psycholinguistic variables and word recognition times. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 2366–2387.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1014-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonin, P., Méot, A., Lagarrigue, A., & Roux, S. (2015). Written object naming, spelling to dictation, and immediate copying: Different tasks, different pathways? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1268–1294.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.978877 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonin, P., Peereman, R., & Fayol, M. (2001). Do phonological codes constrain the selection of orthographic codes in written picture naming? Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 688–720.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2786 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brysbaert, M., & Ghyselinck, M. (2006). The effect of age of acquisition: Partly frequency related, partly frequency independent. Visual Cognition, 13, 992–1011.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280544000165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cai, H., Qi, X., Chen, Q., & Zhong, Y. (2012). Effects of phonetic radical position on the regularity effect for naming pictophonetic characters (in Chinese). Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44, 868–881.  https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1041.2012.00868 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cai, Q., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLoS ONE, 5, e10729:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010729 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Cai, Z. G., & Vigliocco, V. (2018). Word processing. In J. T. Wixted & S. Thompson-Schill (Eds.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, Volume 3: Language and thought (4th ed., pp. 75–110). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Carreiras, M., & Perea, M. (2004). Naming pseudowords in Spanish: Effects of syllable frequency. Brain and Language, 90, 393–400.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2003.12.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Chang, Y. N., Hsu, C. H., Tsai, J. L., Chen, C. L., & Lee, C. Y. (2016). A psycholinguistic database for traditional Chinese character naming. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 112–122.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0559-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Chen, B. G., & Peng, D. L. (1998). The influence of concreteness on word recognition (in Chinese). Acta Psychologica Sinica, 30, 387–393.Google Scholar
  19. Chinese Character Encoding Group of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, & Chinese Pinyin Characters Research Group in Shanghai. (1988). Dictionary of Chinese Character Information (汉字信息字典). Beijing, China: Science Press.Google Scholar
  20. Chinese Ministry of Culture & State Language Affairs Commission. (1986). Dictionary of Common Chinese Characters in Print (印刷通用汉字字形表). Beijing, China: Language Reform Publishing HouseGoogle Scholar
  21. Chinese Ministry of Culture & State Language Affairs Commission. (1988). Modern Dictionary of Common Characters in Chinese (现代汉语通用字表). Beijing, China: The Press and Publications Administration of the P.R.C.Google Scholar
  22. Cholin, J., Levelt, W. J. M., & Schiller, N. O. (2006). Effects of syllable frequency in speech production. Cognition, 99, 205–235.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Coltheart, V., Laxon, V. J., & Keating, C. (1988). Effects of word imageability and age of acquisition on children’s reading. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1988.tb02270.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cortese, M. J., Simpson, G. B., & Woolsey, S. (1997). Effects of association and imageability on phonological mapping. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 226–231.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209397 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Damian, M. F. (2003). Articulatory duration in single-word speech production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 416–431.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.3.416 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N. (2007). Time pressure and phonological advance planning in spoken production. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 195–209.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Damian, M. F., & Dumay, N. (2009). Exploring phonological encoding through repeated segments. Language & Cognitive Processes, 24, 685–712.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802351260 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Damian, M. F., & Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H. (2009). Advance planning of form properties in the written production of single and multiple words. Language & Cognitive Processes, 24, 555–579.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802346500 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Delattre, M., Bonin, P., & Barry, C. (2006). Written spelling to dictation: Sound-to-spelling regularity affects both writing latencies and durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1330–1340.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1330 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ellis, A. W., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2000). Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: Insights from connectionist networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1103–1123.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.5.1103 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Ferrand, L., New, B., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., Bonin, P., Meot, A., ... Pallier, C. (2010). The French Lexicon Project: lexical decision data for 38,840 French words and 38,840 pseudowords. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 488–496.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.488
  32. Ferreira, F., & Swets, B. (2002). How incremental is language production? Evidence from the production of utterances requiring the computation of arithmetic sums. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 57–84.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2797 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fu, Y. (1989). Dictionary of Chinese character properties(汉字属性字典). Beijing, China: Language and Culture Press.Google Scholar
  34. Geschwind, N. (1969). Problems in the anatomical understanding of the aphasias. In A. L. Benton (Ed.), Contributions to clinical neuropsychology. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
  35. Ghyselinck, M., Lewis, M. B., & Brysbaert, M. (2004). Age of acquisition and the cumulative-frequency hypothesis: A review of the literature and a new multi-task investigation. Acta Psychologica, 115, 43–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.11.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. González-Alvarez, J., & Palomar-García, M.-A. (2016). Syllable frequency and spoken word recognition: An inhibitory effect. Psychological Reports, 119, 263–275.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116654449 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Grömping, U. (2006). Relative importance for linear regression in R: The package relaimpo. Journal of Statistical Software, 17, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Guasch, M., Ferré, P., & Fraga, I. (2016). Spanish norms for affective and lexico-semantic variables for 1,400 words. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1358–1369.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0684-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Jescheniak, J. D., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic in formation and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 824–843.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.824 Google Scholar
  40. Johnson, J. W., & Lebreton, J. M. (2004). History and use of relative importance indices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 238–257.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104266510 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kandel, S., & Perret, C. (2015). How does the interaction between spelling and motor processes build up during writing acquisition? Cognition, 136, 325–336.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kello, C. T., Plaut, D. C., & MacWhinney, B. (2000). The task dependence of staged versus cascaded processing: An empirical and computational study of Stroop interference in speech perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 340–360.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.3.340 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Keuleers, E., Diependaele, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Practice effects in large-scale visual word recognition studies: A lexical decision study on 14,000 Dutch mono- and disyllabic words and nonwords. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 174:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00174 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Keuleers, E., Lacey, P., Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). The British Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 28,730 monosyllabic and disyllabic English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 287–304.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0118-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Kousta, S.-T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2011). The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 14–34.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021446 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Leck, K. J., Weekes, B. S., & Chen, M. J. (1995). Visual and phonological pathways to the lexicon: Evidence from Chinese readers. Memory & Cognition, 23, 468–476.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lee, C.-Y., Tsai, J.-L., Su, E. C.-I., Tzeng, O. J. L., & Hung, D. L. (2005). Consistency, regularity, and frequency effects in naming Chinese. Language and Linguistics, 6, 75–107.Google Scholar
  48. Leong, C. K., Cheng, P.-W., & Mulcahy, R. (1987). Automatic processing of morphemic orthography by mature readers. Language and Speech, 30, 181–196.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098703000207 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–38, disc. 38–75.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99001776 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Lewis, M. B. (1999). Age of acquisition in face categorisation: Is there an instance-based account? Cognition, 71, B23–B39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00020-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Lewis, M. B., Gerhand, S., & Ellis, H. D. (2001). Re-evaluating age-of-acquisition effects: Are they simply cumulative-frequency effects? Cognition, 78, 189–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00117-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Lien, Y.-W. (1985). Consistency of the phonetic clues in the Chinese phonograms and their naming latencies. Psychological Department. National Taiwan University, Taipei.Google Scholar
  53. Linguistics Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. (2011). Xinhua dictionary (新华字典, version 11). Beijing, China: Commercial Press.Google Scholar
  54. Liu, Y., Shu, H., & Li, P. (2007). Word naming and psycholinguistic norms: Chinese. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 192–198.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193147 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Luria, A. R. (1970). Traumatic aphasia. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ni, H. (1982). Dictionary of modern Chinese phonograms (现代汉字形声字字汇). Beijing, China: Language and Culture Press.Google Scholar
  57. Peng, D., & Wang, C. (1997). Basic processing unit of Chinese character recognition: Evidence from stroke number effect and radical number effect (in Chinese). Acta Psychologica Sinica, 29.Google Scholar
  58. Perez, M. A. (2007). Age of acquisition persists as the main factor in picture naming when cumulative word frequency and frequency trajectory are controlled. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 32–42.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600577423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pexman, P. M., Lupker, S. J., & Jared, D. (2001). Homophone effects in lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 139–156.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.139 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Qu, Q., Damian, M. F., Zhang, Q., & Zhu, X. (2011). Phonology contributes to writing: Evidence from written word production in a nonalphabetic script. Psychological Science, 22, 1107–1112.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Qu, Q., Zhang, Q., & Damian, M. F. (2016). Tracking the time course of lexical access in orthographic production: An event-related potential study of word frequency effects in written picture naming. Brain and Language, 159, 118–126.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2016.06.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Rapp, B., Benzing, L., & Caramazza, A. (1997). The autonomy of lexical orthography. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14, 71–104.  https://doi.org/10.1080/026432997381628 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Roux, S., McKeeff, T. J., Grosjacques, G., Afonso, O., & Kandel, S. (2013). The interaction between central and peripheral processes in handwriting production. Cognition, 127, 235–241.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Schriefers, H., de Ruiter, J. P., & Steigerwald, M. (1999). Parallelism in the production of noun phrases: Experiments and reaction time models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 702–720.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.3.702 Google Scholar
  65. Schriefers, H., & Teruel, E. (1999). Phonological facilitation in the production of two-word utterances. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 11, 17–50.  https://doi.org/10.1080/713752301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sereno, S. C., Brewer, C. C., & O’Donnell, P. J. (2003). Context effects in word recognition: Evidence for early interactive processing. Psychological Science, 14, 328–333.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.14471 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Shu, H., Chen, X., Anderson, R. C., Wu, N., & Xuan, Y. (2003). Properties of school Chinese: Implications for learning to read. Child Development, 74, 27–47.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00519 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Søvik, N., Arntzen, O., Samuelstuen, M., & Heggberget, M. (1994). Relations between linguistic word groups and writing. In C. Faure, G. Lorette, & A. Vinter (Eds.), Advances in handwriting and drawing: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 231–246). Paris, France: Europia.Google Scholar
  69. Su, Y.-F., & Samuels, S. J. (2010). Developmental changes in character-complexity and word-length effects when reading Chinese script. Reading and Writing, 23, 1085–1108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9197-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sze, W. P., Rickard Liow, S. J., & Yap, M. J. (2014). The Chinese Lexicon Project: A repository of lexical decision behavioral responses for 2,500 Chinese characters. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 263–273.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0355-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. van Galen, G. P. (1991). Handwriting: Issues for a psychomotor theory. Human Movement Science, 10, 165–191.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9457(91)90003-G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wang, C., & Zhang, Q. (2015). Phonological codes constrain output of orthographic codes via sublexical and lexical routes in Chinese written production. PLoS ONE, 10, e0124470.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124470 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Wang, Q., & Dong, Y. (2013). The N2- and N400-like effects of radicals on complex Chinese characters. Neuroscience Letters, 548, 301–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2013.05.074 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Woollams, A. M. (2005). Imageability and ambiguity effects in speeded naming: Convergence and divergence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 878–890.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.5.878 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. www.cctv.com (2006). 你提笔忘字吗?http://news.cctv.com/education/20061011/104804.shtml [Retrieved 14/05/2018].
  76. Yang, S., Zhang, S., & Wang, Q. (2016). P2 and behavioral effects of stroke count in Chinese characters: Evidence for an analytic and attentional view. Neuroscience Letters, 628, 123–127.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2016.06.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Yap, M. J., Liow, S. J., Jalil, S. B., & Faizal, S. S. (2010). The Malay Lexicon Project: A database of lexical statistics for 9,592 words. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 992–1003.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.992 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Zhang, J., & Li, M. (2010). The effects of Chinese input methods on the links among the orthography, phonology and meaning of Chinese characters (in Chinese). Journal of Psychological Science, 33, 835–838.Google Scholar
  79. Zhang, Q., & Damian, M. F. (2010). Impact of phonology on the generation of handwritten responses: Evidence from picture-word interference tasks. Memory & Cognition, 38, 519–528.  https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.4.519 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zhang, Q., & Feng, C. (2017). The interaction between central and peripheral processing in Chinese handwritten production: Evidence from the effect of lexicality and radical complexity. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 334.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00334 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. Zhang, Q., & Wang, C. (2014). Syllable frequency and word frequency effects in spoken and written word production in a non-alphabetic script. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 120.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00120 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhang, Q., & Wang, C. (2015). Phonology is not accessed earlier than orthography in Chinese written production: Evidence for the orthography autonomy hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 448.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00448 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. Zhang, Q., & Yang, Y. (2003). The determiners of picture-naming latency (in Chinese). Acta Psychologica Sinica, 35, 447–454.Google Scholar
  84. Zhou, X., Shu, H., Bi, Y., & Shi, D. (1999). Is there phonologically mediated access to lexical semantics in reading Chinese. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 135–171). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, and Center for Studies of Psychological Application, School of PsychologySouth China Normal UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Linguistics and Modern Languages/Brain and Mind InstituteThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations