Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-24T08:29:59.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Equality, Reciprocity, or Need? Bolstering Welfare Policy Support for Marginalized Groups with Distributive Fairness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2022

ANDREJ FINDOR Open the ORCID record for ANDREJ FINDOR [Opens in a new window] ,
MATEJ HRUŠKA Open the ORCID record for MATEJ HRUŠKA [Opens in a new window] ,
ROMAN HLATKY Open the ORCID record for ROMAN HLATKY [Opens in a new window] ,
TOMÁŠ HRUSTIČ Open the ORCID record for TOMÁŠ HRUSTIČ [Opens in a new window]  and
ZUZANA BOŠEĽOVÁ
ANDREJ FINDOR*
Affiliation:
Comenius University, Slovak Republic
MATEJ HRUŠKA*
Affiliation:
Comenius University, Slovak Republic
ROMAN HLATKY*
Affiliation:
University of North Texas, United States
TOMÁŠ HRUSTIČ*
Affiliation:
Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovak Republic
ZUZANA BOŠEĽOVÁ*
Affiliation:
Milan Šimečka Foundation, Slovak Republic
*
Andrej Findor, Associate Professor, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University, Slovak Republic, andrej.findor@fses.uniba.sk.
Matej Hruška, Researcher, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University, Slovak Republic, matej.hruska@fses.uniba.sk.
Roman Hlatky, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of North Texas, United States, roman.hlatky@unt.edu.
Tomáš Hrustič, Senior Researcher, Institute of Ethnology and Social Anthropology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovak Republic, tomas.hrustic@savba.sk.
Zuzana Bošeľová, Program Manager, Milan Šimečka Foundation, Slovak Republic, zuza@nadaciams.sk.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The literature on welfare chauvinism suggests that dominant majorities are less likely to support redistribution across identity lines. To encourage support, scholarship recommends designing policies universally and signaling beneficiary deservingness. However, policies that support disadvantaged groups cannot always be designed universally. Moreover, dominant groups often hold minoritized groups to a deservingness double standard. Thus, we ask, what are effective ways to increase support for out-group redistribution? We argue that distributive justice principles—justifications for who should get what and why—can bolster support for out-group redistributive policies. We test this argument through three experiments in Slovakia, with the Roma as the out-group. Majority Slovaks support policies predicated on the principle of reciprocity—with benefits conditional on contribution. Unconditional policies and policies that are motivated by the need principle garner minority Roma support. Given salient anti-Roma prejudice, we consider our findings a floor. For less stigmatized out-groups, reciprocity-based policies may further bolster support.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 117 , Issue 3 , August 2023 , pp. 805 - 821
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alesina, Alberto, and Glaeser, Edward L.. 2004. Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World of Difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, Jørgen Goul, and Bjørklund, Tor. 1990. “Structural Changes and New Cleavages: The Progress Parties in Denmark and Norway.” Acta Sociologica 33 (3): 195–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Elizabeth. 2021. “Deserving to Whom? Investigating Heterogeneity in the Impact of Social Constructions of Target Populations on Support for Affirmative Action.” Policy Studies Journal 49 (1): 268–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracic, Ana. 2020. Breaking the Exclusion Cycle: How to Promote Cooperation between Majority and Minority Ethnic Groups. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, David, and Bostic, Amie. 2015. “Paradoxes of Social Policy: Welfare Transfers, Relative Poverty, and Redistribution Preferences.” American Sociological Review 80 (2): 268–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Henry E., Verba, Sidney, and Schlozman, Kay Lehman. 1995. “Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation.” American Political Science Review 89 (2): 271–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodkin, Evelyn Z., and Larsen, Flemming. 2013. “Changing Boundaries: The Policies of Workfare in the U.S. and Europe.” Poverty & Public Policy 5 (1): 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broockman, David E., Kalla, Joshua L., and Sekhon, Jasjeet S.. 2017. “The Design of Field Experiments with Survey Outcomes: A Framework for Selecting More Efficient, Robust, and Ethical Designs.” Political Analysis 25 (4): 435–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavaillé, Charlotte, and Trump, Kris-Stella. 2015. “The Two Facets of Social Policy Preferences.” The Journal of Politics 77 (1): 146–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clasen, Jochen, and van Oorschot, Wim. 2002. “Changing Principles in European Social Security.” European Journal of Social Security 4 (2): 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clifford, Scott, Sheagley, Geoffrey, and Piston, Spencer. 2021. “Increasing Precision without Altering Treatment Effects: Repeated Measures Designs in Survey Experiments.” American Political Science Review 115 (3): 1048–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csata, Zsombor, Hlatky, Roman, and Liu, Amy H.. 2021. “How to Head Count Ethnic Minorities: Validity of Census Surveys versus Other Identification Strategies.” East European Politics 37 (3): 572–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Swaan, Abram. 1988. In Care of the State: Health Care, Education, and Welfare in Europe and the USA in the Modern Era. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deutsch, Morton. 1975. “Equity, Equality, and Need: What Determines Which Value Will Be Used as the Basis of Distributive Justice?” Journal of Social Issues 31 (3): 137–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dráľ, Peter. 2008. “Symbolic Processes of Social Exclusion of Roma in Slovak Public Policy Discourse.” Ethnicity Studies [Etniskumo Studijos], no. 3, 85–116.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2020. “The New EU Roma Strategic Framework for Equality, Inclusion and Participation” (Full Package). European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/new-eu-roma-strategic-framework-equality-inclusion-and-participation-full-package_en.Google Scholar
European Court of Auditors. 2016. “EU Policy Initiatives and Financial Support for Roma Integration: Significant Progress Made over the Last Decade, but Additional Efforts Needed on the Ground.” Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR16_14/SR_ROMA_EN.pdf.Google Scholar
Feldman, Stanley, and Huddy, Leonie. 2005. “Racial Resentment and White Opposition to Race-Conscious Programs: Principles or Prejudice?” American Journal of Political Science 49 (1): 168–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fellowes, Matthew C., and Rowe, Gretchen. 2004. “Politics and the New American Welfare States.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (2): 362–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filčák, Richard, Szilvasi, Marek, and Škobla, Daniel. 2018. “No Water for the Poor: The Roma Ethnic Minority and Local Governance in Slovakia.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 41 (7): 1390–1407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Findor, Andrej, Hruška, Matej, Hlatky, Roman, Hrustič, Tomáš, and Bošeľová, Zuzana. 2022. “Replication Data for: Equality, Reciprocity, or Need? Bolstering Welfare Policy Support for Marginalized Groups with Distributive Fairness.” Harvard Dataverse. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/6KCW8Z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Robert. 2016. “Who Should We Help? An Experimental Test of Discrimination in the British Welfare State.” Political Studies 64 (3): 630–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Robert, and Kootstra, Anouk. 2017. “Do White Voters Support Welfare Policies Targeted at Ethnic Minorities? Experimental Evidence from Britain.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 43 (1): 80–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franz, Romeo. 2020. “Why EU’s New Roma Strategy Is Welcome, but Toothless.” EUobserver, October 8. https://euobserver.com/opinion/149677.Google Scholar
Gesthuizen, Maurice, Savelkoul, Michael, and Scheepers, Peer. 2021. “Patterns of Exclusion of Ethno-Religious Minorities: The Ethno-Religious Hierarchy across European Countries and Social Categories within These Countries.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 82 (9): 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1995. “Racial Attitudes and Opposition to Welfare.” The Journal of Politics 57 (4): 994–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorodzeisky, Anastasia. 2011. “Who Are the Europeans That Europeans Prefer? Economic Conditions and Exclusionary Views toward European Immigrants.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 52 (1–2): 100–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grauzelová, Táňa, and Markovič, Filip. 2020. Príjmy a Životné Podmienky v Marginalizovaných Rómskych Komunitách. Vybrané Ukazovatele Zo Zisťovania EU SILC MRK 2018. Bratislava: Úrad splnomocnenca vlády SR pre rómske komunity.Google Scholar
Green, Donald Philip, and Cowden, Jonathan A.. 1992. “Who Protests: Self-Interest and White Opposition to Busing.” The Journal of Politics 54 (2): 471–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grill, Jan. 2018. “Re-Learning to Labour? “Activation Works” and New Politics of Social Assistance in the Case of Slovak Roma.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 24 (S1): 105–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanna, Rema, and Olken, Benjamin A.. 2018. “Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 32 (4): 201–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harell, Allison, Soroka, Stuart, and Iyengar, Shanto. 2016. “Race, Prejudice and Attitudes toward Redistribution: A Comparative Experimental Approach.” European Journal of Political Research 55 (4): 723–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hlatky, Roman. 2021. “EU Funding and Euroskeptic Vote Choice.” Political Research Quarterly 74 (2): 348–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hrustič, Tomáš. 2020. “How Roma Mayors Penetrate the Municipal Power Structures: Resisting the Non-Roma Dominance in Slovak Local Governments.” Slovenský Národopis [Slovak Ethnology] 68 (4): 397–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurwitz, Jon, and Peffley, Mark. 2005. “Playing the Race Card in the Post-Willie Horton Era: The Impact of Racialized Code Words on Support for Punitive Crime Policy.” Public Opinion Quarterly 69 (1): 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Cusack, Thomas R.. 2000. “The Causes of Welfare State Expansion: Deindustrialization or Globalization?” World Politics 52 (3): 313–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Soskice, David. 2001. “An Asset Theory of Social Policy Preferences.” American Political Science Review 95 (4): 875–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalla, Joshua L., and Broockman, David E.. 2020. “Reducing Exclusionary Attitudes through Interpersonal Conversation: Evidence from Three Field Experiments.” American Political Science Review 114 (2): 410–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kam, Cindy D., and Kinder, Donald R.. 2007. “Terror and Ethnocentrism: Foundations of American Support for the War on Terrorism.” Journal of Politics 69 (2): 320–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kende, Anna, Hadarics, Márton, Bigazzi, Sára, Boza, Mihaela, Kunst, Jonas R., Lantos, Nóra Anna, Lášticová, Barbara, Minescu, Anca, Pivetti, Monica, and Urbiola, Ana. 2021. “The Last Acceptable Prejudice in Europe? Anti-Gypsyism as the Obstacle to Roma Inclusion.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 24 (3): 388–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. 1986. “The Continuing American Dilemma: White Resistance to Racial Change 40 Years after Myrdal.” Journal of Social Issues 42 (2): 151–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Sanders, Lynn M.. 1996. Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Kam, Cindy D.. 2009. Us against Them: Ethnocentric Foundations of American Opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kóczé, Angéla. 2020. “Gendered and Racialized Social Insecurity of Roma in East Central Europe.” In The Roma and Their Struggle for Identity in Contemporary Europe, eds. van Baar, Huub and Kóczé, Angéla, 124–49. New York: Berghahn Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kootstra, Anouk. 2016. “Deserving and Undeserving Welfare Claimants in Britain and the Netherlands: Examining the Role of Ethnicity and Migration Status Using a Vignette Experiment.” European Sociological Review 32 (3): 325–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kros, Mathijs, and Coenders, Marcel. 2019. “Explaining Differences in Welfare Chauvinism between and within Individuals over Time: The Role of Subjective and Objective Economic Risk, Economic Egalitarianism, and Ethnic Threat.” European Sociological Review 35 (6): 860–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, Mikkel, and Schaeffer, Merlin. 2021. “Healthcare Chauvinism during the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 47 (7): 1455–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, Richard R., and Heldman, Caroline. 2009. “Self-Interest, Symbolic Attitudes, and Support for Public Policy: A Multilevel Analysis.” Political Psychology 30 (4): 513–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, Eric, Stoker, Robert, and Wolman, Harold. 2013. “The Effects of Beneficiary Targeting on Public Support for Social Policies.” Policy Studies Journal 41 (2): 199–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Amy H. 2015. Standardizing Diversity: The Political Economy of Language Regimes. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lødemel, Ivar, and Trickey, Heather, eds. 2001. “An Offer You Can’t Refuse”: Workfare in International Perspective. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Messing, Vera. 2014. “Methodological Puzzles of Surveying Roma/Gypsy Populations.” Ethnicities 14 (6): 811–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David. 2001. Principles of Social Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. 2021. “Improving Experimental Treatments in Political Science.” In Advances in Experimental Political Science, eds. Green, Donald P. and Druckman, James N., 219–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., and Kinder, Donald R.. 1996. “Issue Frames and Group-Centrism in American Public Opinion.” The Journal of Politics 58 (4): 1055–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paluck, Elizabeth Levy, Porat, Roni, Clark, Chelsey S., and Green, Donald P.. 2021. “Prejudice Reduction: Progress and Challenges.” Annual Review of Psychology 72:533–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, Michael Bang. 2012. “Social Welfare as Small-Scale Help: Evolutionary Psychology and the Deservingness Heuristic.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, Michael Bang, Sznycer, Daniel, Cosmides, Leda, and Tooby, John. 2012. “Who Deserves Help? Evolutionary Psychology, Social Emotions, and Public Opinion about Welfare.” Political Psychology 33 (3): 395–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poslon, Xenia, Lasticova, Barbara, Popper, Miroslav, Hargašová, Lucia, and Belán, Dóra. 2020. “Postoje, politický diskurz a kolektívne správanie majority voči Rómom na Slovensku. Výsledky reprezentatívneho prieskumu.” Bratislava: Ústav výskumu sociálnej komunikácie SAV. http://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25475.45608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ram, Melanie H. 2014. “Europeanized Hypocrisy: Roma Inclusion and Exclusion in Central and Eastern Europe.” Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe 13 (3): 15–44.Google Scholar
Ravasz, Ábel, Kovács, Ľuboš, and Markovič, Filip. 2020. Atlas Rómskych Komunít 2019. Bratislava: VEDA.Google Scholar
Reeskens, Tim, and van Oorschot, Wim. 2012. “Disentangling the “New Liberal Dilemma”: On the Relation between General Welfare Redistribution Preferences and Welfare Chauvinism.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 53 (2): 120–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeskens, Tim, and van Oorschot, Wim. 2013. “Equity, Equality, or Need? A Study of Popular Preferences for Welfare Redistribution Principles across 24 European Countries.” Journal of European Public Policy 20 (8): 1174–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, Richard, Rodrigue, Edward, and Kneebone, Elizabeth. 2016. Five Evils: Multidimensional Poverty and Race in America. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Rehm, Philipp. 2011. “Social Policy by Popular Demand.” World Politics 63 (2): 271–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roosma, Femke, Gelissen, John, and van Oorschot, Wim. 2013. “The Multidimensionality of Welfare State Attitudes: A European Cross-National Study.” Social Indicators Research 113 (1): 235–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rothstein, Bo. 1998. Just Institutions Matter: The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rövid, Márton. 2011. “One-Size-Fits-All Roma? On the Normative Dilemmas of the Emerging European Roma Policy.” Romani Studies 21 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Anne, and Ingram, Helen. 1993. “Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy.” American Political Science Review 87 (2): 334–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O., and Funk, Carolyn L.. 1991. “The Role of Self-Interest in Social and Political Attitudes.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. Zanna, Mark P., 24:1–91. Salt Lake City, UT: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Skitka, Linda J. 1999. “Ideological and Attributional Boundaries on Public Compassion: Reactions to Individuals and Communities Affected by a Natural Disaster.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25 (7): 793–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skitka, Linda J., and Tetlock, Philip E.. 1993. “Providing Public Assistance: Cognitive and Motivational Processes Underlying Liberal and Conservative Policy Preferences.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (6): 1205–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Škobla, Daniel, Csomor, Gábor, and Filadelfiová, Jarmila. 2018. “Change in the Social Assistance System and Its Impact on Activation Allowance Provision in Slovakia.” Prognostické Práce Foresight, Analysis and Recommendations / PP—FAR 10 (1–2): 31–46.Google Scholar
Škobla, Daniel, and Filčák, Richard. 2020. “Requesting Labour Activation without Addressing Inequalities: A Move towards Racialised Workfare in Slovakia.” In Austerity across Europe. Lived Experiences of Economic Crises, eds. Hall, Sarah Marie, Pimlott-Wilson, Helena, and Horton, John, 154–66. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobotka, Eva, and Vermeersch, Peter. 2012. “Governing Human Rights and Roma Inclusion: Can the EU Be a Catalyst for Local Social Change?” Human Rights Quarterly 34 (3): 800–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumner, William Graham. 1907. Folkways. A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores and Morals. Boston, MA: Ginn and Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tankard, Margaret E., and Paluck, Elizabeth Levy. 2016. “Norm Perception as a Vehicle for Social Change.” Social Issues and Policy Review 10 (1): 181–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trehan, Nidhi, and Kóczé, Angéla. 2009. “Racism, (Neo-)Colonialism and Social Justice: The Struggle for the Soul of the Romani Movement in Post-Socialist Europe.” In Racism Postcolonialism Europe, eds. Huggan, Graham and Law, Ian, 50–74. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar
van Baar, Huub. 2012. “Socio-Economic Mobility and Neo-Liberal Governmentality in Post-Socialist Europe: Activation and the Dehumanisation of the Roma.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 38 (8): 1289–1304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Oorschot, Wim. 2006. “Making the Difference in Social Europe: Deservingness Perceptions among Citizens of European Welfare States.” Journal of European Social Policy 16 (1): 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeersch, Peter. 2012. “Reframing the Roma: EU Initiatives and the Politics of Reinterpretation.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 38 (8): 1195–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidra, Zsuzsanna. 2018. “Hungary’s Punitive Turn: The Shift from Welfare to Workfare.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 51 (1): 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, Bernard. 1985. “An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion.” Psychological Review 92 (4): 548–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wike, Richard, Poushter, Jacob, Silver, Laura, Devlin, Kat, Fetterolf, Janell, Castillo, Alexandra, and Huang, Christine. 2019. “Views on Minority Groups across Europe.” Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project (blog). October 14, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/14/minority-groups/.Google Scholar
Wright, Matthew, and Reeskens, Tim. 2013. “Of What Cloth Are the Ties That Bind? National Identity and Support for the Welfare State across 29 European Countries.” Journal of European Public Policy 20 (10): 1443–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucker, Gail S., and Weiner, Bernard. 1993. “Conservatism and Perceptions of Poverty: An Attributional Analysis.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23 (12): 925–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Findor et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/6KCW8Z
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Findor et al. supplementary material

Findor et al. supplementary material 1

Download Findor et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 181 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Findor et al. supplementary material

Findor et al. supplementary material 2

Download Findor et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 45.7 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Findor et al. supplementary material

Findor et al. supplementary material 3

Download Findor et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 155.2 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Findor et al. supplementary material

Findor et al. supplementary material 4

Download Findor et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 258.4 KB