Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author: m.Elyasi@atu.ac.ir

2 Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor at Department of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabai University

4 Ph.D. Student, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The current digital revolution has given rise to a new organizational form, the Platform company. Today, the most valuable companies in the world and the first ones with a market value of more than a trillion dollars are platform companies. The Platform Economy is developing at an exponential rate and has become a top priority for governments across the world. The present study aims to provide a framework for evaluating the Digital Platform Economy at the international level. Utilizing a systematic review and meta-synthesis approach, the Platform Economy dimensions are identified as Digital Users, Digital Entrepreneurs, Digital Platforms, Digital Infrastructure, Innovation Capacity, and Institutional Environment and by extracting relevant indicators from international reports, the Platform Economy Composite Index is developed. Using the Partial Least Squares-Path Modelling (PLS-PM) method and specifically the Higher-Order Construct model, the measurement model is validated, and by employing a non-compensatory aggregation method, the Platform Economy Composite Index ranks 128 countries. The study is concluded by scrutinizing Iran’s current status regarding the enabling factors of the platform economy and identifying its strengths and weaknesses and providing recommendations for improvement. The results indicate that although Iran’s current status in terms of demand-side enablers is relatively good, it faces serious issues in terms of supply-side enablers.

Introduction

The emergence and proliferation of the application of big data, cloud computing and new algorithms have led to the formation of a platform economy built around platform companies. This new generation of digital businesses has disrupted several industries and often are startups that have become new market leaders (Acs et al., 2021).Companies like Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta are examples of such businesses. The market value of these five companies was close to 9 trillion dollars in December 2021 (Companiesmarketcap, 2021), equivalent to 9.5% of the global GDP (O'Neill, 2021).
The immense value creation power of the platform economy has made its the key to inclusive economic growth for both advanced and developing economies, and a catalyst for economic and social leapfrogging opportunities in developing countries (Chakravorti et al., 2019). However, platform economy literature has neglected the assessment of the national factors that have given rise to the platforms and therefore, it is necessary to identify the national factors that enable the emergence and growth of digital platforms (Hermes et al., 2020).
However, a review of the research literature indicates that the evaluation of platform economy at the national level has not made much progress and the few studies that have attempted this (Chakravorti et al., 2019; Morvan et al., 2016), have been primarily focused on the developed countries and therefore are more compatible with the conditions of these countries. Consequently, policymakers in developing countries, despite having different conditions, must refer to the experiences of developed countries for the development of platform economy policies. Since there is a limited understanding of the effectiveness of such policies on enhancing the efficiency of the platform economy, this approach can be challenging (Szerb et al., 2022).
Against this background, this study aims to develop a comprehensive framework for evaluating the platform economy of countries at different levels of development. Utilizing a systematic review and meta-synthesis approach, the enabling dimensions of the platform economy are identified as Digital Users, Digital Entrepreneurs, Digital Platforms, Digital Infrastructure, Innovation Capacity, and Institutional Environment. Based on this framework and by extracting relevant indicators from international reports, the Platform Economy Composite Index is constructed. The study concludes by closely examining Iran's current situation in terms of the enabling factors of the platform economy. It identifies the country's strengths and weaknesses and offers recommendations for improvement.

Research Question(s)

The main question of this research is defined as follows:
What are the dimensions and components of a comprehensive framework for evaluating the platform economy and how can a composite index be developed using this framework?

Literature Review

Digital platforms serve as intermediaries that facilitate interactions and exchange of values between at least two different and interdependent user groups in platform ecosystems (Drewel et al., 2021).
There is no consensus on the definition of the platform economy, and different terms such as Sharing Economy, Collaborative Economy, Access Economy, and Gig Economy have been used to refer to this phenomenon in academic and policy research (Riso, 2019). However, the term Platform Economy has gained more prevalence due to its more inclusive connotations. Kenney and Zysman (2016) consider the term Platform Economy a “more neutral term as they believe it encompasses a growing number of digitally enabled activities in business, politics, and social interaction”. Here, the platform economy is defined as a value creation system consisting of platforms and platform ecosystems (Dufva et al., 2017).
A review of the research literature indicates that the evaluation of platform economy at the national level has not made much progress (Szerb et al., 2022), and the few studies that have evaluated the platform economy at the national level, have been primarily focused on developed economies e.g., Morvan et al. (2016) developed Platform Readiness Index to evaluate readiness level of 16 countries of G20 countries in the development of platforms. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge there is no systematic review focused on the identification of platform economy enablers at the national level. Therefore, utilizing a systematic review and meta-synthesis approach, this study aims to develop a comprehensive framework for evaluating the platform economy of countries at different levels of development.

Methodology

The main steps for developing a composite index include developing a conceptual framework, selecting individual indicators, imputation of missing data, multivariate analysis, normalization, aggregation, and composite index validation (OECD, 2008).
The first step of constructing a composite index is the development of a conceptual framework that encompasses the dimensions and components of the phenomenon being measured. To this end, based on a meta-synthesis approach, a systematic review was conducted. The meta-synthesis approach was implemented using the Noblit and Hare (1988) seven-step method: 1. getting started; 2. deciding what is relevant; 3. reading the studies; 4. determining how the studies are related; 5. translating the studies into one another; 6. synthesizing translations; 7. expressing the synthesis. This resulted in the extraction of 6 dimensions and 16 components as platform economy enablers which are presented in the proposed conceptual framework for the platform economy evaluation.
Based on this framework and by extracting relevant indicators from international reports, the Platform Economy Composite Index is constructed. Using the Partial Least Squares-Path Modelling (PLS-PM) method and specifically the Higher-Order Construct model, the measurement model is validated, and by employing a non-compensatory aggregation method, the Platform Economy Composite Index ranks 128 countries.

Conclusion

This study attempted to develop a comprehensive framework for evaluating the efficiency of the platform economy of countries at different levels of development. Using a systematic review and meta-synthesis approach, Digital Users, Digital Entrepreneurs, Digital Platforms, Digital Infrastructure, Innovation Capacity, and Institutional Environment were identified as the evaluating dimensions of the platform economy.
Furthermore, Iran's current situation in terms of the enabling factors of the platform economy was closely examined and country's strengths and weaknesses were identified. The results from the Platform Economy Composite Index indicate that while Iran is in a relatively good position regarding demand-side enablers, it is facing significant challenges with supply-side enablers.
Keywords: Digital Platform, Platform Economy, Composite Index, International Ranking.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

  1. Acs, Z. J., Song, A. K., Audretsch, D. B. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). The Evolution of the Global Digital Platform Economy. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/s1‌1‌1‌8‌7‌-0‌2‌1‌-0‌0‌5‌6‌1‌-x
  2. Bahia, K., Agnoletto, F. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Mobile Connectivity Index Methodology. GSM Association. https://www.gsma.com/r/wp-content/uploads/2‌0‌2‌0‌/0‌9‌/GSMA-Mobile-Connectivity-Index-Methodology-2‌0‌2‌0‌.pdf
  3. Bukht, R., Heeks, R. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Digital economy policy in developing countries. (DIODE Working Papers; No. 6‌). https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌1‌3‌9‌/ssrn.3‌5‌4‌0‌0‌2‌7‌
  4. Cataldo, R., Crocetta, C., Grassia, M. G., Lauro, N. C., Marino, M., Voytsekhovska, V. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Methodological PLS-PM framework for SDGs system. Social Indicators Research, 1‌5‌6‌(2‌), 7‌0‌1‌-7‌2‌3‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/s1‌1‌2‌0‌5‌-0‌2‌0‌-0‌2‌2‌7‌1‌-5‌
  5. Cavallo, A., Ghezzi, A., Dell'Era, C., Pellizzoni, E. (2‌0‌1‌9‌). Fostering digital entrepreneurship from startup to scaleup: The role of venture capital funds and angel groups. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1‌4‌5‌, 2‌4‌-3‌5‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌1‌6‌/j.techfore.2‌0‌1‌9‌.0‌4‌.0‌2‌2‌
  6. Chakravorti, B., Chaturvedi, R. S., Filipovic, C., Brewer, G. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Digital In the Time of Covid. The Fletcher School at Tufts University. https://digitalplanet.tufts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2‌0‌2‌2‌/0‌9‌/digital-intelligence-index.pdf
  7. Chakravorti, B., Fillpovic, C., Chaturvedi, R. (2‌0‌1‌9‌). Ease of Doing Digital Business 2‌0‌1‌9‌. Which Countries Help Expedite Entry, Growth, and Exit of Technology-Based Businesses. https://digitalplanet.tufts.edu /wp-content/uploads/2‌0‌2‌2‌/1‌0‌/Ease-of-Doing-Digital-Business-2‌0‌1‌9‌_2‌0‌2‌0‌.pdf
  8. Chin, W. W. (1‌9‌9‌8‌). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 2‌9‌5‌(2‌), 2‌9‌5‌-3‌3‌6‌.
  9. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Largest tech companies by market cap. Retrieved December 2‌0‌2‌1‌ from https:// companiesmarketcap.com/
  10. Drewel, M., Özcan, L., Koldewey, C., Gausemeier, J. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Pattern‐based development of digital platforms. Creativity and Innovation Management, 3‌0‌(2‌), 4‌1‌2‌-4‌3‌0‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌1‌1‌/caim.1‌2‌4‌1‌5‌
  11. Dufva, M., Koivisto, R., Ilmola-Sheppard, L., Junno, S. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). Anticipating Alternative Futures for the Platform Economy. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7‌(9‌), 6‌-1‌6‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌2‌2‌1‌5‌/timreview/1‌1‌0‌2‌
  12. Dutta, S., Lanvin, B. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). The Network Readiness Index 2‌0‌2‌0‌. Washington: Portulans Institute. https://networkreadinessindex.org/ wp-content/uploads/2‌0‌2‌2‌/0‌9‌/NRI_2‌0‌2‌0‌_Report.pdf
  13. Foley, P., Sutton, D., Potter, R., Patel, S., Gemmell, A. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). International digital economy and society index 2‌0‌2‌0‌. The European Commission, Directorate-General of Communications Networks, Content and Technology. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌7‌5‌9‌/7‌5‌7‌4‌1‌1‌
  14. Fu, X., Avenyo, E., Ghauri, P. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Digital platforms and development: a survey of the literature. Innovation and Development, 1‌1‌(2‌-3‌), 3‌0‌3‌-3‌2‌1‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌8‌0‌/2‌1‌5‌7‌9‌3‌0‌X.2‌0‌2‌1‌.1‌9‌7‌5‌3‌6‌1‌
  15. Grybaite, V., Stankeviciene, J. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). An empirical analysis of factors affecting sharing economy growth. Oeconomia Copernicana, 9‌(4‌), 6‌3‌5‌-6‌5‌4‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌4‌1‌3‌6‌/oc.2‌0‌1‌8‌.0‌3‌1‌
  16. Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., Ray, S. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/9‌7‌8‌-3‌-0‌3‌0‌-8‌0‌5‌1‌9‌-7‌
  17. Hanna, N. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). A role for the state in the digital age. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 7‌(1‌), 1‌-1‌6‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌8‌6‌/s1‌3‌7‌3‌1‌-0‌1‌8‌-0‌0‌8‌6‌-3‌
  18. Hermes, S., Clemons, E., Schreieck, M., Pfab, S., Mitre, M., Böhm, M., Wiesche, M., Krcmar, H. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Breeding Grounds of Digital Platforms: Exploring the Sources of American Platform Domination, China’s Platform Self-Sufficiency, and Europe’s Platform Gap. In Proceedings of the 2‌8‌th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), An Online AIS Conference. https://web.archive.org/web/2‌0‌2‌1‌0‌8‌1‌2‌0‌2‌3‌2‌1‌7‌id_/https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1‌&article=1‌1‌3‌1‌&context=ecis2‌0‌2‌0‌_rp
  19. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Strategies and policies for the deployment of broadband in developing countries. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/stg/D-STG-SG0‌1‌.0‌1‌.2‌-2‌0‌2‌1‌-PDF-E.pdf
  20. Katz, R., Callorda, F. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Accelerating the development of Latin American digital ecosystem and implications for broadband policy. Telecommunications Policy, 4‌2‌(9‌), 6‌6‌1‌-6‌8‌1‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌1‌6‌/j.telpol.2‌0‌1‌7‌.1‌1‌.0‌0‌2‌
  21. Katz, R., Koutroumpis, P., Callorda, F. M. (2‌0‌1‌4‌). Using a digitization index to measure the economic and social impact of digital agendas. info, 1‌6‌(1‌), 3‌2‌-4‌4‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌0‌8‌/info-1‌0‌-2‌0‌1‌3‌-0‌0‌5‌1‌
  22. Kenney, M., Bearson, D., Zysman, J. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). The platform economy matures: measuring pervasiveness and exploring power. Socio-Economic Review, 1‌9‌(4‌), 1‌4‌5‌1‌-1‌4‌8‌3‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌9‌3‌/ser/mwab0‌1‌4‌
  23. Kenney, M., Zysman, J. (2‌0‌1‌6‌). The rise of the platform economy. Issues in science and technology, 3‌2‌(3‌), 6‌1‌.
  24. Kleinke, K. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Multiple imputation by predictive mean matching when sample size is small. Methodology. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌2‌7‌/1‌6‌1‌4‌-2‌2‌4‌1‌/a0‌0‌0‌1‌4‌1‌
  25. Lin, J., Li, N., Alam, M. A., Ma, Y. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Data-driven missing data imputation in cluster monitoring system based on deep neural network. Applied Intelligence, 5‌0‌(3‌), 8‌6‌0‌-8‌7‌7‌. https://doi.org/0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/s1‌0‌4‌8‌9‌-0‌1‌9‌-0‌1‌5‌6‌0‌-y
  26. Malecki, E. J. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography compass, 1‌2‌(3‌), e1‌2‌3‌5‌9‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌1‌1‌/gec3‌.1‌2‌3‌5‌9‌
  27. Mazziotta, M., Pareto, A. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). Synthesis of indicators: The composite indicators approach. In Complexity in society: From indicators construction to their synthesis (pp. 1‌5‌9‌-1‌9‌1‌). Springer. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/9‌7‌8‌-3‌-3‌1‌9‌-6‌0‌5‌9‌5‌-1‌_7‌
  28. Morris, T. P., White, I. R., Royston, P. (2‌0‌1‌4‌). Tuning multiple imputation by predictive mean matching and local residual draws. BMC medical research methodology, 1‌4‌(1‌), 1‌-1‌3‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌8‌6‌/1‌4‌7‌1‌-2‌2‌8‌8‌-1‌4‌-7‌5‌
  29. Morvan, L., Hintermann, F., Vazirani, M. (2‌0‌1‌6‌). Five ways to win with digital platforms. https://citizen-entrepreneurs.com/wp-content/uploads/2‌0‌2‌0‌/1‌1‌/Accenture_Long-Report_Digital-version.pdf
  30. Noblit, G. W., Hare, R. D. (1‌9‌8‌8‌). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies (Vol. 1‌1‌). sage.
  31. O'Neill, A. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) 2‌0‌2‌6‌. https://www.statista.com/statistics/2‌6‌8‌7‌5‌0‌/global-gross-domestic-product-gdp/
  32. (2‌0‌0‌8‌). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: methodology and user guide. OECD publishing. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌7‌8‌7‌/9‌7‌8‌9‌2‌6‌4‌0‌4‌3‌4‌6‌6‌-en
  33. Quimba, F. M. A., Rosellon, M. A. D., Calizo Jr, S. C. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Digital divide and the platform economy: Looking for the connection from the Asian experience . https://www.econstor.eu/handle/1‌0‌4‌1‌9‌/2‌4‌1‌0‌1‌9‌
  34. Retamal, M., Dominish, E. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). The sharing economy in developing countries. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/1‌0‌4‌5‌3‌/1‌5‌9‌2‌9‌9‌/2‌/ISF_The%2‌0‌Sharing%2‌0‌Economy%2‌0‌in%2‌0‌Developing%2‌0‌Countries_2‌0‌1‌7‌.pdf
  35. Riso, S. (2‌0‌1‌9‌). Mapping the contours of the platform economy. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/wpef1‌9‌0‌6‌0‌.pdf
  36. Rojanakit, P., de Oliveira, R. T., Dulleck, U. (2‌0‌2‌2‌). The sharing economy: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 1‌3‌9‌, 1‌3‌1‌7‌-1‌3‌3‌4‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌1‌6‌/j.jbusres.2‌0‌2‌1‌.1‌0‌.0‌4‌5‌
  37. Rossotto, C. M., Lal Das, P., Gasol Ramos, E., Clemente Miranda, E., Badran, M. F., Martinez Licetti, M., Miralles Murciego, G. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Digital platforms: A literature review and policy implications for development. Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, 1‌9‌(1‌-2‌), 9‌3‌-1‌0‌9‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌1‌7‌7‌/1‌7‌8‌3‌5‌9‌1‌7‌1‌8‌8‌0‌9‌4‌8‌5‌
  38. Sambuli, N. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Governance of the platform economy in developing countries and emerging economies. GIZ. https://emsdialogues.org/wp-content/uploads/GIZ_Survey-publication_Governance-of-the-platform-economy-1‌.pdf
  39. Shamizanjani, M., Shirmohammadi, M., Bazyar, M. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Digital Iran- National Roadmap Executive Summary 2‌0‌2‌0‌-2‌0‌2‌5‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌3‌1‌4‌0‌/RG.2‌.2‌.2‌3‌3‌4‌4‌.9‌9‌8‌4‌0‌
  40. Song, A. K. (2‌0‌1‌9‌). The Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem—a critique and reconfiguration. Small Business Economics, 5‌3‌(3‌), 5‌6‌9‌-5‌9‌0‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/s1‌1‌1‌8‌7‌-0‌1‌9‌-0‌0‌2‌3‌2‌-y
  41. Sussan, F., Acs, Z. J. (2‌0‌1‌7‌). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 4‌9‌(1‌), 5‌5‌-7‌3‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/s1‌1‌1‌8‌7‌-0‌1‌7‌-9‌8‌6‌7‌-5‌
  42. Szerb, L., Komlosi, E. S., Acs, Z. J., Lafuente, E., Song, A. K. (2‌0‌2‌2‌). The Digital Platform Economy Index 2‌0‌2‌0‌. Springer. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌/9‌7‌8‌-3‌-0‌3‌0‌-8‌9‌6‌5‌1‌-5‌
  43. Tanenhaus, M., Vincenzo, E., Chatelin, Y., Lauro, C. (2‌0‌0‌5‌). PLS Path Modeling: Computational Statistic and Data Analysis. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.1‌0‌1‌6‌/j.csda.2‌0‌0‌4‌.0‌3‌.0‌0‌5‌
  44. Yoo, T., de Wysocki, M., Cumberland, A. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Country digital readiness: Research to determine a country’s digital readiness and key interventions. Cisco Corporate Affair, 1‌1‌. https://www.cisco.com /c/dam/assets/csr/pdf/Country-Digital-Readiness-White-Paper-US.pdf
  45. Ghasemzadeh, M., Khojasteh, H., SalmaniShahmohammadi, A. (2‌0‌2‌1‌). Providing a Governance Model on Online Video Platforms Emphasizing Industry Self-Regulation. Interdisciplinary Studies in Media and Culture, 1‌1‌(2‌). https://doi.org/1‌0‌.3‌0‌4‌6‌5‌/ismc.2‌0‌2‌1‌.3‌8‌6‌6‌3‌.2‌4‌7‌5‌ [In Persian]
  46. Hajiakhoondi, E., HashemzadehKhorasgani, G., Boushehri, A. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Identify the Major Factors Affecting the Success of Open Innovation in the Digital Knowledge-based Business Ecosystem. Industrial Management 1‌2‌(2‌), 3‌4‌4‌-3‌7‌2‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌5‌9‌/imj.2‌0‌2‌0‌.3‌1‌2‌7‌6‌9‌.1‌0‌0‌7‌7‌9‌6‌ [In Persian]
  47. Motavaseli, M., Shojaei, S., Chitsazan, H., Mohammadi- Elyasi, G. (2017). Institutional Barriers to Venture Capital Investment in Iran: A study to explore the incentives of investment in technology based small firms. Entrepreneurship Development, 1‌0‌(3‌), 4‌7‌7‌-4‌9‌6‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌5‌9‌/jed.2‌0‌1‌7‌.2‌3‌7‌8‌0‌8‌.6‌5‌2‌2‌6‌3‌ [In Persian]
  48. Nasri, S., Ghazinoory, S., Montazer, G. (2‌0‌2‌0‌). Investigating the Digital Divide Problem in Iran Based on the New Approach of "Problem-oriented Innovation System" Information Management, 6‌(1‌), 2‌4‌7‌-2‌7‌1‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌3‌4‌/aimj.2‌0‌2‌0‌.1‌2‌5‌5‌0‌9‌ [In Persian]
  49. Sharifi, S., Marzban, B., Labafi, S. (2‌0‌1‌8‌). Investigating the laws and Regulations in Monitoring Content Production in Cyberspace in Iran. Public Administration, 1‌0‌(2‌), 2‌5‌1‌-2‌6‌8‌. https://doi.org/1‌0‌.2‌2‌0‌5‌9‌/jipa.2‌0‌1‌8‌.2‌5‌4‌2‌4‌8‌.2‌2‌3‌5‌ [In Persian]