Archiwum Filozofii Prawa
i Filozofii SpołecznejJournal of the Polish Section of IVR ISSN 2082-3304Logo of the Polish Section of IVRPolish Section of IVR ↗

Research article

Nudge Without Evidence: The Hidden Risks of Behavioural Policy

Article authors
  1. Maria Pawińska — corresponding author

Nudge Without Evidence: The Hidden Risks of Behavioural Policy

Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, nr 2(47)/2026, s. 92–111

DOI 10.36280/afpifs.2026.2.92 ↗
Issue
nr 2(47)/2026
Pages
92–111
Published
Article language
English

English

Abstract

Nudge interventions have risen to prominence as ostensibly evidence-based regulatory tools, predicated on empirical insights into human decision-making. In theory, successful nudges require rigorous preparation, including carefully designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pilot studies, to ensure they achieve their anticipated effects. In practice, however, many nudges fail to deliver the intended outcomes. This article explores the key determinants of such failures, with particular attention to issues in trial design and quality, the frequent reliance on ad hoc “copy-and-paste” approaches, and even absence of preparatory research. Consequently, this suboptimal implementation invites a range of objections regarding the legitimacy of behavioural regulation. Critics contend that nudges may be misused as technocratic exercises of power, provide a façade of government action without meaningfully addressing regulatory challenges, or function as instruments wielded by unqualified authorities. These flawed implementations give rise to a host of adverse consequences, such as side-effects of the regulation or unintended counter-effects. By dissecting these systemic shortcomings, this article offers a critical assessment of the relationship between approaches based on behavioural economics insights and regulatory practice, urging renewed scrutiny of nudge implementation processes to safeguard their credibility and efficacy. Key words: nudge, RCTs, behavioural intervention, evidence-based regulation, implementation, abuse of power

Full text PDF How to cite

References

86 reference entries

References

  1. Alemanno A., Spina A., Nudging Legally: On the Checks and Balances of Behavioral Regulation, “International Journal of Constitutional Law” 2014, vol. 12, issue 2, pp. 429–456, https://doi. org/10.1093/icon/mou033.

  2. Amir O., Lobel O., Stumble, Predict, Nudge: How Behavioral Economics Informs Law and Policy, “Columbia Law Review” 2008, vol. 108, no. 8, pp. 2098–2137, http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 40041817 (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  3. Anders J., Brown Ch., Ehren M., Greany T., Nelson R., Evaluation of Complex Whole-School Interventions: Methodological and Practical Considerations. A Report for the Education Endowment Foundation, October 2017, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/ documents/evaluation/methodological-research-and-innovations/EEF_CWSI_RESOURCE_ FINAL_25.10.17.pdf (accessed: 4.04.2026) Ibidem, p. 760. Ibidem, p. 763. K. Tobia, How People Judge What Is Reasonable, “Alabama Law Review” 2018, vol. 70, p. 293, https://pa-

  4. pers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3108236 (accessed: 4.04.2026).

  5. Baldwin R., From Regulation to Behaviour Change: Giving Nudge the Third Degree, “The Modern Law Review” 2014, vol. 77, pp. 831–857, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12094.

  6. Begg C., Cho M., Eastwood S., Horton R., Moher D., Olkin I., Pitkin R., Rennie D., Schulz K.F., Simel D., Stroup D.F., Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement, JAMA, 28 August 1996, pp. 637–639, doi: 10.1001/jama.276.8.637.

  7. Cairney P., The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making, Palgrave Pivot, London 2015.

  8. Campbell J.Y., Restoring Rational Choice: The Challenge of Consumer Financial Regulation, “American Economic Review” 2016, vol. 106, pp. 1–30, https://scholar.harvard.edu/campbell/publications/ restoring-rational-choice-challenge-consumer-financial-regulation (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  9. Chabé-Ferret S., Le Coënt P., Lefebvre C., Préget R., Salanié F., Subervie J., Thoyer S., When Nudges Backfire: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment to Boost Biological Pest Control, “Annals of Economics and Statistics” 2024, vol. 156, pp. 9–30, https://brgm.hal.science/hal-04900081/ document (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  10. Chater N., Loewenstein G., The I-Frame and the s-Frame: How Focusing on Individual-Level Solutions Has Led Behavioral Public Policy Astray, “Behavioral and Brain Sciences” 2023, no. 46, pp. 1–63, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22002023.

  11. Collins J., Why Behavioral Economics is Itself Biased, “Economics”, 12 December 2020, https://evonomics.com/why-behavioral-economics-is-itself-biased/ (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  12. Congiu L., Moscati I., A Review of Nudges: Definitions, Justifications, Effectiveness, “Journal of Economic Surveys” 2022, no. 36, pp. 188–213, https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12453.

  13. Craig P., Dieppe P., Macintyre S., Michie S., Nazareth I., Petticrew M., Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions: The New Medical Research Council Guidance, “International Journal of Nursing Studies” 2013, vol. 50, pp. 1–6.

  14. Deaton A., Cartwright N., Understanding and Misunderstanding Randomized Controlled Trials, “Social Science & Medicine” 2018, no. 210, pp. 2–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed. 2017.12.005.

  15. DellaVigna S., Linos E., RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence from Two Nudge Units, “Econometrica” 2022, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 81–116, https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA18709.

  16. Donohue III J.J., Wolfers J., Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate, “Stanford Law Review” 2006, vol. 58, pp. 791–846, https://ssrn.com/abstract=870312 (accessed: 4.04.2026).

  17. Dumanovsky T., Changes in Energy Content of Lunchtime Purchases from Fast Food Restaurants After Introduction of Calorie Labelling: Cross Sectional Customer Surveys, “The British Medical Journal” 2011, vol. 343, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d4464.

  18. Farrell H., Shalizi C., “Nudge” Policies are Another Name for Coercion, “New Scientist”, 2 November 2011, https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228376-500-nudge-policies-are-anothername-for-coercion/ (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  19. Ferguson C.J., Heene M., A Vast Graveyard of Undead Theories Publication Bias and Psychological Science’s Aversion to the Null, “Perspectives on Psychological Science” 2012, vol. 7, issue 6, pp. 555–561, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612459059.

  20. Frey B.S., Gallus J., Beneficial and Exploitative Nudges [in:] Nudging – Possibilities, Limitations and Applications in European Law and Economics, eds. K. Mathis, A. Tor, 3rd ed., Springer, Cham 2016, pp. 11–20.

  21. Gane N., Nudge Economics as Libertarian Paternalism, “Theory, Culture & Society” 2021, vol. 38, issue 6, p. 119, doi.org/10.1177/0263276421999447.

  22. Gigerenzer G., On the Supposed Evidence for Libertarian Paternalism, “Review of Philosophy and Psychology” 2015, vol. 6, pp. 361–383, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-015-0248-1.

  23. Glaeser E.L., Paternalism and Psychology, “University of Chicago Law Review” 2006, vol. 73, issue 1, pp. 133–156, https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol73/iss1/8/ (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  24. Grüne-Yanoff T., Behavioral Public Policy, One Name, Many Types. A Mechanistic Perspective [in:] The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Economics, eds. C. Heilmann, J. Reiss, Routledge, New York 2021, pp. 480–493.

  25. Hansen P.G., Jespersen A.M., Nudge and the Manipulation of Choice: A Framework for the Responsible Use of the Nudge Approach to Behaviour Change in Public Policy, “European Journal of Risk Regulation” 2013, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 3–28, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24323381 (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  26. Hallsworth M., A Manifesto for Applying Behavioral Science, Behavioural Insights Team Blog, 20 March 2023, p. 45, https://www.bi.team/publications/a-manifesto-for-applying-behavioral-science/ (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  27. Heal J., Groot B., Running RCTs With Complex Interventions, Behavioural Insights Team Blog, 1 November 2017, https://www.bi.team/blogs/running-rcts-with-complex-interventions/ (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  28. Hertwig R., Grüne-Yanoff T., Nudging and boosting: Steering or empowering good decisions, “Perspectives on Psychological Science” 2017, vol. 12, issue 6, pp. 973–986, https://doi. org/10.1177/1745691617702496.

  29. Hill A., Jack A., Harvard Fraud Claims Fuel Doubts over Science of Behaviour, “The Financial Times”, 29 June 2023, https://www.ft.com/content/846cc7a5-12ee-4a44-830e-11ad00f224f9 (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  30. Hollands G.J., Shemilt I., Marteau T.M., Jebb S.A., Kelly M.P., Nakamura R., Suhrcke M., Ogilvie D., Altering Micro-Environments to Change Population Health Behaviour: Towards an Evidence Base for Choice Architecture Interventions, “BMC Public Health” 2013, vol. 13, pp. 1–6, https://doi. org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-1218.

  31. Hummel D., Maedche A., How Effective is Nudging? A Quantitative Review on the Effect Sizes and Limits of Empirical Nudging Studies, “Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics” 2019, vol. 80, pp. 47–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2019.03.005.

  32. Kiszko K.M., Martinez O.D., Abrams C., Elbel B., The Influence of Calorie Labeling on Food Orders and Consumption: A Review of the Literature, “Journal of Community Health” 2014, vol. 39, pp. 1248–1269, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-014-9876-0.

  33. Kristal A.S., Whillans A.V., What We Can Learn from Five Naturalistic Field Experiments That Failed to Shift Commuter Behaviour, “Nature Human Behaviour” 2020, no. 4, pp. 169–176, https://doi. org/10.1038/s41562-019-0795-z.

  34. Lazanski D., A Nudge Towards Totalitarianism?, Institute of Economic Affairs, 9 October 2009, https://iea.org.uk/blog/a-nudge-towards-totalitarianism-0/ (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  35. Lepenies R., Małecka M., The Institutional Consequences of Nudging – Nudges, Politics, and the Law, “Review of Philosophy and Psychology” 2015, no. 6, pp. 427–437, doi: 10.1007/s13164-015- 0243-6.

  36. Lewis P.G., Policy Thinking, Fast and Slow: A Social Intuitionist Perspective on Public Policy Processes, “APSA Annual Meeting Paper” 2013, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=2300479 (accessed: 27.01.2025).

  37. Liscow Z., Markovits D., Democratizing Behavioral Economics, “Yale Journal on Regulation” 2022, no. 39, p. 1217, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4012996.

  38. Lithwick D., Taming Your Inner Homer Simpson: How to Opt Out of Our Own Stupid Choices, Slate, 12 May 2008, https://slate.com/culture/2008/05/cass-sunstein-and-richard-thaler-s-nudge. html (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  39. Loewenstein G., Chater N., Putting Nudges in Perspective, “Behavioural Public Policy” 2017, no. 1, pp. 25–53, https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/loewenstein/putting_nudges_in_perspective.pdf (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  40. Machery E., What is a Replication?, “Philosophy of Science” 2020, no. 87, pp. 545–567.

  41. Madi M.A., The Dark Side of Nudges, Routledge, London – New York 2020.

  42. Maier M., Bartoš F., Stanley T.D., Shanks D.R., Harris A.J.L., Wagenmakers E.-J., No Evidence for Nudging After Adjusting for Publication Bias, “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences” 2022, vol. 119, pp. 1–2.

  43. Maki A., Carrico A.R., Raimi K.T., Truelove H.B., Araujo B., Yeung K.L., Meta-Analysis of Pro-Environmental Behaviour Spillover, Nature Sustainability, “Nature” 2019, vol. 2(4), pp. 307–315, https://ideas. repec.org/a/nat/natsus/v2y2019i4d10.1038_s41893-019-0263-9.html (accessed: 17.04.2026).

  44. Marchiori D.R., Adriaanse M.A., De Ridder D.T.D., Unresolved Questions in Nudging Research: Putting the Psychology Back in Nudging, “Social and Personality Psychology Compass” 2017, no. 11, pp. 1–13, https://www.uu.nl/sites/default/files/marchiori-et-al-2017-social-and-personalitypsychology-compass.pdf (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  45. McChesney F.S., Behavioral Economics: Old Wine in Irrelevant New Bottles?, “Supreme Court Economic Review” 2014, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 43–76, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/675265 (accessed: 22.04.2026).

  46. McCrudden C., King J., The Dark Side of Nudging: The Ethics, Political Economy, and Law of Libertarian Paternalism [in:] Choice architecture in democracies: Exploring the Legitimacy of Nudging, eds. A. Kemmerer, C. Möllers, M. Steinbeis, G. Wagner, Nomos/Hart, Oxford 2017, pp. 67–132.

  47. Mertens S., Herberz M., Hahnel U.J.J., Brosch T., The effectiveness of Nudging: A Meta-Analysis of Choice Architecture Interventions Across Behavioral Domains, “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences” 2022, no. 119, pp. 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107346118.

  48. Mills S., Nudge Theory: What 15 Years of Research Tells us About its Promises and Politics, The Conversation, 6 September 2023, https://theconversation.com/nudge-theory-what-15-years-ofresearch-tells-us-about-its-promises-and-politics-210534 (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  49. Mills S., Whittle R., Seeing the Nudge from the Trees: The 4S Framework for Evaluating Nudges, “Public Administration” 2024, vol. 102, issue 2, pp. 580–600, https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12941.

  50. Mullett T., What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of Nudging?, Warwick Business School, 14 February 2022, https://www.wbs.ac.uk/news/what-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-nudging (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  51. Munafò M.R. Nosek B., Bishop D. et al., A Manifesto for Reproducible Science, “Nature Human Behaviour” 2017, no. 1, pp. 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.

  52. Nickerson R.S., How We Know—and Sometimes Misjudge—What Others Know: Imputing One’s Own Knowledge to Others, “Psychological Bulletin” 1999, vol. 125, no. 6, pp. 737–759, https:// doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.737.

  53. Nørnberg T.R., Houlby L., Skov L.R., Perez-Cuet F.J.A., Choice Architecture Interventions for Increased Vegetable Intake and Behaviour Change in a School Setting: A systematic Review, “Perspectives in Public Health” 2015, no. 136, pp. 1–11.

  54. Oliver A., Nudges, Shoves and Budges: Behavioural Economic Policy Frameworks, “The International Journal of Health Planning and Management” 2018, vol. 33, issue 1, pp. 272–283, https://doi. org/10.1002/hpm.2419.

  55. Oliver K., Innvar S., Lorenc T., Woodman J., Thomas J., A Systematic Review of Barriers to and Facilitators of the Use of Evidence by Policymakers, “BMC Health Services Research” 2014, vol. 14, pp. 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-2.

  56. O’Neill B., A Message to the Illiberal Nudge Industry: Push Off, Spiked-online.com, 1 November 2010, https://www.spiked-online.com/2010/11/01/a-message-to-the-illiberal-nudge-industry-push-off/ (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  57. Open Science Collaboration, Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science, “Science” 2015, vol. 349, issue 6251, p. 943, doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716.

  58. Osman M., McLachlan S., Fenton N., Neil M., Löfstedt R., Meder B., Learning from Behavioural Changes That Fail, “Trends in Cognitive Sciences” 2020, vol. 24, issue 12, pp. 969–980, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.09.009.

  59. Petimar J., Ramirez M., Rifas-Shiman S.L., Linakis S., Mullen J., Roberto Ch.A., Bloc J.P., Evaluation of the Impact of Calorie Labeling on McDonald’s Restaurant Menus: A Natural Experiment, “The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity” 2019, vol. 16, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-019-0865-7.

  60. Rizzo M.J., Rationality – What? Misconceptions of Neoclassical and Behavioral Economics [in:] The Cambridge Handbook of Classical Liberal Thought, ed. M.T. Henderson, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge – New York – Melbourne 2018, pp. 191–212.

  61. Rizzo M.J., Whitman D.G., Little Brother is Watching You: New Paternalism on the Slippery Slopes, “Arizona Law Review” 2009, vol. 51, pp. 685–739, https://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/51-3/51arizlrev685.pdf (accessed: 3.04.2026).

  62. Rizzo M.J., Whitman D.G., The Knowledge Problem of New Paternalism, “Brigham Young University Law Review” 2009, issue 4, pp. 905–968, https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/ vol2009/iss4/4 (accessed: 4.04.2026).

  63. Saccardo S., Dai H., Han M., Raja N., Vangala S., Croymans D., Scaling Nudges: Who Moves and How, SSRN, 9 July 2025, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3971192.

  64. Sanbonmatsu M.D., Cooley E.H., Butner J.E., The Impact of Complexity on Methods and Findings in Psychological Science, “Frontiers in Psychology” 2021, no. 11, pp. 1–16, doi: 10.3389/ fpsyg.2020.580111.

  65. Scheiber N., The Harvard Professor and the Bloggers, “The New York Times”, 30 September 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/30/business/the-harvard-professor-and-the-bloggers. html (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  66. Schneider S., Technocracy Without Society: A Critique of Nudging as an Approach to Managing Risk, “International Review of Applied Economics” 2025, vol. 39, pp. 919–931, https://doi.org/10.1 080/02692171.2024.2384457.

  67. Shrout P.E., Rodgers J.L., Psychology, Science, and Knowledge Construction: Broadening Perspectives from the Replication Crisis, “Annual Review of Psychology” 2018, no. 69, pp. 487–510, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845.

  68. Skoble A.J., The Dangers of Nudging—the Use of State Coercion to Affect Behaviour, Fraser Institute, 19 January 2018, https://www.fraserinstitute.org/commentary/dangers-nudging-use-state-coercion-affect-behaviour (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  69. Skov L.R., Lourenço S., Hansen G.L., Mikkelsen B.E., Schofield C., Choice Architecture as a Means to Change Eating Behaviour in Self‐Service Settings: A Systematic Review, “Obesity Reviews” 2013, no. 14, pp. 187–196, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2012.01054.x.

  70. Stern J., An Unsettling Hint at How Much Fraud Could Exist in Science, “The Atlantic”, 2 August 2023, https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2023/08/gino-ariely-data-fraud-allegations/674891/ (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  71. Stibe A., Cugelman B., Persuasive Backfiring: When Behavior Change Interventions Trigger Unintended Negative Outcomes [in:] Persuasive Technology, eds. A. Meschtscherjakov, B. De Ruyter, V. Fuchsberger, M. Murer, M. Tscheligi, Series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9638, Springer, Cham 2016, pp. 65–77, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31510-2_6.

  72. Sunstein C.R., Risk and Reason: Safety, Law, and the Environment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2002.

  73. Sunstein C.R., Simpler: The Future of Government, Simon & Schuster, New York – London – Toronto 2013.

  74. Sunstein C.R., The ethics of nudging, “Yale Journal on Regulation” 2015, vol. 32, issue 2, pp. 413– 450, https://www.yalejreg.com/print/the-ethics-of-nudging/ (accessed: 4.04.2026).

  75. Szaszi B., Palinkas A., Palfi B., Szollosi A., Aczel B., A Systematic Scoping Review of the Choice Architecture Movement: Toward Understanding When and Why Nudges Work, “Journal of Behavioral Decision Making” 2018, no. 31, pp. 355–366, https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2035.

  76. Thaler R.H., Sunstein C.R., Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness, Yale University Press, New Haven 2008.

  77. The House of Lords, Science and Technology Select Committee, Definitions, Categorisation and the Ethics of Behaviour Change Interventions, Parliament.uk, 2011, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201012/ldselect/ldsctech/179/17905.htm (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  78. Tincani M., Travers J., Replication Research, Publication Bias, and Applied Behavior Analysis, “Perspectives on Behavior Science” 2019, vol. 42, pp. 59–75, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019- 00191-5.

  79. Tobia K., How People Judge What Is Reasonable, “Alabama Law Review” 2018, vol. 70, pp. 293–359, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3108236 (accessed: 4.04.2026).

  80. Tobia K., Legal Concepts and Legal Expertise, “Synthese” 2024, vol. 203, pp. 1–45.

  81. Torres M.M.J., Carlsson F., Direct and Spillover Effects of a Social Information Campaign on Residential Water Savings, “Journal of Environmental Economics and Management” 2018, vol. 92, pp. 222–243, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2018.08.005.

  82. Treasury H.M., Magenta Book Annex: Handling complexity in policy evaluation, Gov.uk., March 2020, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5e96cab9d3bf7f412b2264b1/HMT_Magenta_Book.pdf (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  83. Underhill K., Broken Experimentation, Sham Evidence-Based Policy, “Yale Law & Policy Review” 2020, vol. 38, no. 150, pp. 151–227, https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/ 3276 (accessed: 9.04.2026).

  84. Van Aaken A.S., Judge the Nudge: Legal Limits in the EU [in:] Nudge and the law: a European perspective, eds. A. Alemanno, A.L. Sibony, Bloomsbury Publishing, Oxford 2015, pp. 83–114.

  85. White M.D., The Crucial Importance of Interests in Libertarian Paternalism [in:] Nudging – Possibilities, Limitations and Applications in European Law and Economics, eds. K. Mathis, A. Tor, 3rd ed., Springer, Cham 2016, pp. 21–38.

  86. Zeilstra R., Nudging and the Safeguards of the Rule of Law, “German Law Journal” 2024, vol. 25, issue 5, pp. 750–771, https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2024.30.

Publication information

Author and affiliation

mgrMaria Pawińska

Uniwersytet Śląski

Issue data

Issue nr 2(47)/2026

Pages
92–111
Published
AccessOtwarty LicenceCC BY 4.0 ↗

How to cite

Bibliographic description and verified export formats.

Format AFPiFS

M. Pawińska, Nudge Without Evidence: The Hidden Risks of Behavioural Policy, „Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej” nr 2(47)/2026, s. 92–111, DOI: 10.36280/afpifs.2026.2.92

Export citation data