1. Introduction

Corruption has been widely recognized as a major obstacle to development and sustainability. The study of corruption in government, and efforts to prevent or contain it, lies at the very core of modern public administration [1]. Prioritizing corruption prevention over merely addressing it after the fact is crucial for maintaining the integrity and functionality of institutions. Preventive measures help to establish a culture of transparency and accountability, reducing the opportunities for corrupt practices to take root. According to the U.S. Strategy on Countering Corruption, effective prevention can mitigate the extensive social, economic, and political damage caused by corruption, which includes undermining public trust and exacerbating inequality [2]. This study seeks to examine the perceptions of Iranian public employees regarding the individual and contextual factors that enable them to avoid engaging in administrative corruption within their professional experiences.

Administrative corruption (also called petty corruption and bureaucratic corruption) occurs when an official or public servant uses official capacities for personal purposes and benefits. The authors in the field [1, 3, 4] have mentioned several examples of administrative corruption practices: among others, collusion (an agreement between two or more people that is made with the purpose of deception, and fraud of people’s legal rights and obtaining unfair benefits), bribery and kickback (receiving gifts, money, sexual favors, political benefits, etc., in exchange for discriminatory behavior or disclosure of secrets), embezzlement (where a person illegally appropriates funds or property), graft (a type of political corruption in which politicians, by abusing their position and power, divert the budgets approved for certain projects in a way that maximizes benefits for their relatives), extortion (including threats of violence or illegal imprisonment or even threats to reveal a person’s previous crimes), influence peddling (a person’s abuse of their influence in the government entities and their familiarity with government officials to obtain discriminatory treatment for the personal benefit of a third party), networking (the networker tries to establish friendly and close relationships with employers, employee selection boards, etc., hoping to use these relationships to influence their decision to hire an unqualified job applicant), nepotism (favoritism; injustice, discrimination, and substitution of a relationship instead of rules in which influence is exerted in favor of one of the relatives or friends), selling confidential information of the organization to others (transferring classified information outside the organization in exchange for personal benefits), and patronage (supporting subordinates in order to gain their support in the future).

Several causes and factors for the commission of administrative corruption have been mentioned. Dimant and Tosato [5], in their study, identified the causes of corruption as follows: greed for money and power, the existence of a monopolized economy, weak civil participation, very little transparency, cumbersome bureaucracy, low press freedom, insufficient integration into the global economic system, poverty, low level of education, and absence of job rotation policy. Some researchers have also mentioned the mechanisms and legal loopholes that make possible the occurrence of administrative corruption and money laundering [6]. Klitgaard [7] puts forward the hypothesis that administrative corruption will occur if the benefit is greater than the punishment or fine multiplied by the probability of arrest and trial.

A line of research has approached the determinants of corruption focusing on the individual and psychosocial factors that influence the commission of corruption. This approach argues that despite conflict of interests, lack of transparency, problems in the law, and the like, corruption is ultimately done by a human agent and based on his/her thoughts, decisions, and actions. In the following, some theoretical and research efforts in this field have been reviewed.

Gender has been one of the individual-level factors investigated in the field of corruption. In countries where more women are involved in governance and workforce, corruption is becoming a less serious problem [8, 9]. However, this correlation does not necessarily imply causation [10]. Some countries even followed this hypothesis in practice. For example, in 1998, Peru’s traffic police was all women, and in 2003, the Mexican Customs Service launched an all-female anti-graft force [11]. Han [12] examined the effect of individual-level determinants on the justifiability of corruption by South Asian people and their tolerance toward corruption, showing that relatively younger and/or less educated and/or collectivistic people are more likely to justify corruption, while older and/or more educated and/or individualistic people are less likely to legitimize it.

People want to maximize their material interests; at the same time, they want to see themselves as ethical actors. Thus, there is a balance between maximizing personal gain and maintaining a view of oneself as a moral person. Köbis et al. [13] have proposed two metaphorical arguments in this regard: the “slippery slope” and the “steep cliff.” In the “slippery slope” hypothesis of corrupt behavior, small acts and small crimes gradually lead to bigger acts. That is, corruption is likened to a “slope” that when a person starts it, he/she gradually speeds up and becomes more and more corrupt. The reason is that most people consider themselves to be “right” in general, and if they do something wrong, they feel like they are going against their identity. Therefore, it takes time for them to become a corrupt person. On the other side of this spectrum (steep cliff), there are so-called “golden opportunity” moments, whereby a single event is tempting by itself; it means that people deal with one-time and big corruptions more easily than small corruptions. Of course, the result of the research by Köbis et al. [13] indicates that the probability that people unexpectedly do something extremely unethical is more than that they are prepared for it, so the possibility of being thrown off the “steep cliff” is higher. Most people believe that they are moral people, so if they do something unethical, they have to adapt it to their identity. Psychologically, it is easier to justify a mistake than mistakes repeated several times. One-off mistakes may create less tension between being ethical, on the one hand, and enjoying the benefits of cheating, on the other. Probably, the person does not consider what was done once as a true indicator of their character. However, in a slippery slope situation, one has to deal with successive immoralities.

Moral compensation theory claims that moral behavior is motivated by the desire to maintain one’s self-image. According to this theory, people compensate to restore their self-image, which is based on the perception of their morality [14]. Concerning compensatory behavior, this theory posits that an initial unethical act threatens a person’s self-worth and subsequently motivates them to pursue a restorative moral act. For example, a person negotiates with himself; she/he donates some money to charity and gives himself/herself the freedom to be more relaxed about something else.

The traditional deterrence-based approach, which is based on rationality, emphasizes the role of controlling and deterring factors in preventing corruption. Followers of this approach believe that government agents consider corruption as a result of rational calculations of costs and profits (cost-benefit analysis). That is, decision makers are rational beings who try to further their interests in a world of scarce resources, and they analyze the cost and benefit of the money or potential power gained versus the risk of getting caught, and even moral torture before making decisions. Lianju and Luyan [15] demonstrated that punishing corruption after it has occurred is not a good way to prevent it from happening in the future, and such corrupt practices are only stopped when their risk is much greater than their potential reward.

Manara et al. [16] explored the intra-individual cognitive-motivational decision-making processes underlying corruption among individuals sentenced for corruption. They intended to identify the specific decision-making stages that people engaged in before deciding to behave corruptly. For most of the typical forms of corruption, their qualitative data support the idea that the process leading to corruption resembles general decision-making models and proceeds through different stages, including the identification of a problem and goal formation, information search, and evaluation of this information. However, their results highlight that corruption may involve a more elaborate decision-making process than previously considered in models of unethical and immoral decision making. In the domain of goals, the informants mentioned not only their personal and organizational goals but also several social goals, including helping farmers, improving public facilities, and aiding the general public. Therefore, they showed that corruption, generally considered immoral behavior used to advance personal goals, can also be a means of achieving prosocial and morally sound goals.

However, Rangone [17] believes that some hidden cognitive factors are involved in the corruption process that should be considered. Rationality has a limited capacity to assess risks and possibilities; it is usually overly optimistic and driven by other biases and heuristics. Cognitive science challenges the hypothesis that people are rational. In the real world, people often do not want to rethink their decisions; they care more about current losses than future gains. Dupuy and Neset [18] also showed that cognitive processes such as justifying narratives (rationalization defense mechanism) are effective in committing corruption.

Othman et al. [19] presented a model of factors influencing administrative corruption based on a qualitative study in Malaysia. This model was designed based on research conducted among experts, representatives of government agencies, and senior public sector employees. In this model, the three main factors of administrative corruption are as follows. (1) Power: This dimension refers to the ability to influence and the ability to exert will, and this originates from the job position in which the person is appointed. (2) Opportunity: Opportunity alone cannot give people self-confidence, but when it is combined with legal power, the amount and frequency of corruption increases due to high self-confidence in committing the act. (3) Moral impurity: Another reason why people commit corrupt acts is the lack of moral values and moral commitment. Farhadinejad [20] also mentioned the low level of adherence to ethics as one of the psychological factors of administrative corruption. Tian [21] showed that there is a significant relationship between the ethical philosophy of Chinese business managers and illegal payments, such as bribes. It is argued that moral relativism has a positive correlation with bribery, and to prevent corruption, absolute ethics should be expanded.

The low level of faith and religiosity is mentioned among the psychological factors of administrative corruption [19, 20]. Khadem and Hemayatkhah [22] surveyed 200 employees of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences and showed that religiosity is a predictor of work ethics. The result of their research indicated that with increasing levels of the experiential dimension of religiosity, organizational ethics increased, and organizational corruption decreased.

High greed has also been found as one of the causes and roots of corruption [5, 19, 20, 22–24]. Not all those who commit administrative corruption are in so much trouble in terms of livelihood that they have to surrender to it, but in some cases people engage in administrative corruption because of extravagance and ambition. The low level of work ethic and conscientiousness has also been identified as one of the factors leading to administrative corruption [20, 25]. In addition, the high degree of risk-taking and lack of fear of deterrent punishments are among the psychological factors [20, 24]. Zhao et al. [26] examined the association between the Dark Triad of personality (i.e., Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy) and corruption through a mediator—belief in good luck. The results indicated that while the Dark Triad of personality positively predicted bribe-offering intention, it was mediated by the belief in good luck in gain-seeking. Their findings also revealed that the Dark Triad of personality was positively related to bribe-taking intention; the link between narcissism and bribe-taking intention and that between psychopathy and bribe-taking intention were mediated by the belief in good luck in penalty avoidance. This research extended previous research by providing evidence that belief in good luck can be one of the reasons explaining why individuals with Dark Triad are more likely to engage in corruption regardless of the potential outcomes.

Contextual and situational factors have also been subject of research inquiries. Manara et al. [16] demonstrated that contextual factors (e.g., task type, time pressure, and hierarchical structures) can determine whether individuals engage in rational or intuitive corruption and dishonesty. Furthermore, an important environmental factor in the appearance of corruption, especially in private organizations, is the criminal nature of the organization itself, which is caused by the profit motive and free market competition. The economic motivations of the organization can cause employees to behave unethically and sometimes illegally for the benefit of their employers, and they benefit indirectly as well [27]. The receipt of salaries depends on the persistence of corrupt practices within organization. Campbell and Göritz [28] investigated the underlying assumptions, core values, and norms in organizations where corruption is most prevalent. In this study, content analysis was conducted on interviews with 14 independent experts about their experience in corrupt organizations. They found that there is an obvious assumption in the culture of such organizations: “The end justifies the means.” An important norm in these organizations is the punishment of deviant (i.e., noncorrupt) behavior. The corrupt people in the organization not only have “ethical blindness” but also tend to protect the “social cocoon” they have built by severely punishing those members who do not want to join in breaking the law. As long as the cocoon rejects outside ideas, the group remains corrupt. On the other hand, in a group environment, newcomers tend to change their personality to adapt to the group identity and be accepted into the group.

Recently, the role of family of origin, as a context, has also been emphasized in anti-corruption research. For example, Nugroho et al. [29] claim that if anti-corruption campaigns are to be effective, mothers must be involved in anti-corruption education, especially for children; they contend that the process of character-building will require early inculcation of anti-corruption ideals to prevent the manifestation of corrupt behavior in the future, and the creation of the virtual community character education will likely help prevent future corruption.

As mentioned above, among other predictors of corruption, several individual and contextual factors can also cause employees to engage in administrative corruption. However, little research has yet been done to identify the individual and contextual factors contributing to the prevention of administrative corruption. Specifically, to our knowledge, there is a paucity of research in this regard among Iranian public servants. It should be noted that although administrative corruption exists in most parts of the world, especially in developing countries, it is a serious problem in Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the countries with a high rate of administrative corruption [1, 30, 31]. In its 2023 report, Transparency International, considering the Corruption Perception Index (CPI), has ranked Iran 149th among 180 countries in terms of the spread of financial corruption, and this is Iran’s worst ranking position in recent years [32].

This Iranian study seeks to tackle this gap by qualitatively exploring the individual and contextual factors associated with administrative corruption avoidance. The research question we set out to answer is “what is the perception of public sector employees about the psychological/contextual factors potentially involved in the prevention of administrative corruption?”

Using a constructivist research paradigm and a qualitative approach, our inquiry helps view the phenomenon from the perspective of the actors and through an intrapsychic lens. In our study, we selected individuals who were not involved in corrupt activities as our research sample. This approach contrasts with previous studies that included participants who were perpetrators of corruption. By focusing on nonperpetrators, our research takes a positive and preventive perspective, which we believe is innovative and enhances the value of our study.

In summary, this study aims to explore the perception of Iranian public employees about the individual and contextual factors that are associated with avoidance of corruption in their personal work experience. By addressing micro-level protective factors, we aim to contribute to research on the multifaceted and complex puzzle of corruption prevention.

2. Materials and Methods

This study was qualitative in design, and we used semistructured interviews to collect data.

3. Results

The results of thematic analysis led to the formation of six main themes: “cognitive characteristics,” “emotional patterns,” “personality characteristics,” “behavioral strategies,” “familial background,” and “organizational context.” These main themes are described below. Figure 1 presents an overview of our findings.

4. Discussion

The present study aimed to identify the perception of Iranian public servants about individual and contextual factors that prevent administrative corruption. The results of data analysis led to the formation of six main themes: “cognitive characteristics,” “emotional patterns,” “personality characteristics,” “behavioral strategies,” “familial background,” and “organizational context.” Some of the findings are discussed and explained in detail below.

The study findings showed that consequence-focused thoughts and beliefs are associated with a reduction in administrative corruption. Belief in the need for authenticity and self-concept preservation, the belief in the irreparability of deviation in human existence, the belief that it is not worth winning the world outside in return for losing the world inside, and belief in the erosive effect of immorality on human existence were among these beliefs. These findings are in line with those of Dunning [14]. Moral compensation theory claims that moral behavior is motivated by the desire to maintain one’s self-image. According to this theory, people compensate to restore their self-image, which is based on the perception of their morality [14]. Concerning compensatory behavior, this theory posits that an initial unethical act jeopardizes a person’s self-worth and subsequently motivates them to pursue a restorative moral act. In the current study, participants believed in the necessity of authenticity and preservation of self-concept, as well as the irreparable nature of deviation in human existence, and this probably caused them to avoid falling into the abyss of corruption.

Thinking about the consequences of one’s actions on others and believing in the importance of reputation and social status were other indicators of consequence-focused thoughts and beliefs. This finding is in line with the research results of Lianju and Luyan [15]. According to the individual rationality theory, the decision to commit corruption is affected by the result of rational calculations of costs and benefits [35, 36]. Such corrupt practices are only stopped when their perceived risk outweighs their potential reward (i.e., benefits of engaging in corrupt undertakings) [15]. The participants in the present study, probably influenced by factors such as thinking about the consequences of their actions on others and considering their reputation and social status, have kept in mind the consequences of committing corruption and have considered them when evaluating their decisions and actions.

Belief in the necessity of halal earning, belief in God’s supervision and omnipresence, and belief in the positive effect of honesty on obtaining God’s satisfaction were also found as signs of consequence-focused thoughts and beliefs in this study, which in a way represent faith in God and having divine piety. This finding is consistent with Othman et al. [19], Khadem and Hemayatkhah [37], and Farhadinejad [20] who identified the low level of faith as one of the psychological factors of administrative corruption. It seems that authentic adherence to religion likely leads to the creation of expectations related to religious roles and may facilitate the emergence of moral awareness and judgment and, consequently, moral conduct and moral behaviors.

The belief that the result of the action will return to the person was another consequence-focused belief associated with the prevention of administrative corruption that was identified in our investigation. To the authors′ knowledge, to date, no findings similar to this have been mentioned in previous studies. The Iranian-Islamic cultural background of the participants in this study can be used to explain this finding. Iranian people are always proud of their rich literature, love Iranian poets, and usually read and sometimes memorize the poems of these poets. Some of these poems have become common expressions and proverbs among Iranians [38]. On the other hand, the official religion of the country is Shiite Islam and this religious culture has been flowing throughout the history of this territory for centuries [39].

Furthermore, many common Persian proverbs such as “whatever you put in the pot, come in your spoon,” “you reap what you sow,” “whatever you give with your hand, you get back from the same hand,” and “whatever you do, you do it to yourself, whether good or bad” are also proof of the existence of this cultural element. There are many references to this concept in Islamic teachings as well. For example, in the Holy Qur’an, verse 39 of Surah An-Najm: “and that a man shall not deserve but (the reward of) his own effort.” Also, verse 7 of Surah Al-Isra: “If you do good, you do good for yourselves; and if you do evil, [you do it] to yourselves. Then when the final promise came, [We sent your enemies] to sadden your faces and to enter the temple in Jerusalem, as they entered it the first time, and to destroy what they had taken over with [total] destruction.” Verses 7 and 8 of Surah Az-Zalzalah also indicate: “So whosoever does an atom’s weight of good shall see it. And whosoever does an atom’s weight of evil shall see it.” In verse 84 of Surah Al-Qasas, we read: “Whoever comes [on the Day of Judgment] with a good deed will have better than it; and whoever comes with an evil deed—then those who did evil deeds will not be recompensed except [as much as] what they used to do.”

The way people view the world is partly based on their socialization in the culture in which they were raised [40, 41]. Through a cultural lens, it was observed that “belief in the return of the results of actions to oneself” as a factor in preventing the commission of administrative corruption-related offenses might have been potentially affected by the cultural heritage of the participants. Of course, it should not be overlooked that the existence of potential cultural components in a society is not enough by itself, and how cultural teachings are transferred to people and how people internalize and actualize them is very important and can make a difference.

The research findings also showed that detachment-promoting thoughts and beliefs are associated with preventing administrative corruption. Thinking about death, refraining from comparing one’s level of welfare with others, and belief in the universality of financial problems are among these beliefs. Research shows that death awareness may move people toward doing right actions and may reduce their tendency toward unethical actions [42]. Remembering death probably causes people not to be so fond of the world, not to be seduced by its ornaments, and not to complain about its hardship and suffering perhaps because all these will disappear one day.

Explaining the role of “refraining from comparing one’s level of welfare with others” and “believing that financial problems are universal” in the prevention of administrative corruption, we support the idea that, as Peng [43] demonstrated, the level of perception of poverty is intensified as a result of comparing one’s life with various aspects of a prosperous life, and even when employees are paid well, since the feeling of need is rather subjective, they may compare themselves with employees of another organization who have more salaries than them. Due to such a comparison and the inability to respond to the infinite human needs, they may think that they have little income and this may be their justification for doing actions outside of moral and legal standards. Therefore, it seems that not comparing oneself with others and believing in the universality of financial problems can lead to a reduction in the perception of poverty among employees and may potentially help them avoid corrupt actions.

It should be noted that when discussing the function of detachment-oriented thoughts, we must differentiate it from that of workers′ preferences for job amenities. Employees do not work just to earn money, but they may also have other preferences in terms of job characteristics. In their study among the employees of cooperative credit banks in Italy, Nese and Troisi [44] focused on staff’s preferences for nonpecuniary characteristics to estimate their monetary valuations of nonmonetary job attributes such as low travel time, good work environment, probability of advancement, clear management rules, personal prestige, opportunities for learning/training, participation in decision-making processes, autonomy and responsibilities, and social aims. They found that low travel time is the most important attribute, followed by opportunities to learn. Moreover, the employees would be willing to accept a lower income in exchange for job characteristics such as low travel times, prospects for advancement, good working environment, potential for learning, and achievement of social aims (e.g., local development). Rowden [45] also underlined the positive association between workplace learning (both formal and informal) and job satisfaction in the context of small- to mid-sized firms. Lyons et al. [46] proposed that workers in the nonprofit sector value the societal contribution of their profession and the sense of personal fulfillment that they gain from their work. Put differently, employees in nonprofit firms are responsive not only to monetary incentives but also to the perceived social value of their job [47]. However, Bright’s [48] study on public service motivation indicated that in the public sector, in spite of its social impact, civil servants do not perceive their occupation as socially valuable as the nonprofit sector staff.

The findings also showed that, from the perspective of the participants, self-oriented conservative personality traits are tied to prevention of corruption. Contentment and lack of ambition, conscientiousness, risk aversion, hope for the future, and self-control were among these characteristics. Greed and ambition have been shown to be one of the factors of administrative corruption [5, 19, 20, 22–24]; therefore, here contentment is considered a protective factor. Work ethic and conscientiousness have been identified in the studies conducted by Rostami et al. [25] and Farhadinejad [20] in the field of corruption. Conscientiousness indicates being accurate and careful. Conscientious people tend to do every job well and take their duties toward others seriously [49]. Therefore, it seems that the participants with this personality characteristic took their duties and responsibilities more seriously and engaged in their work without violating ethics and law. Based on the previous studies [20, 24], high risk tolerance is one of the personality factors of committing corruption. It seems that the risk aversion factor identified in this study may have caused the participants to avoid deterrent punishments or other undesirable cases and not to take risks to commit cases of administrative corruption. High levels of risk aversion can cause a person to consider the risk higher than the potential reward when deciding to commit corruption. Therefore, this issue can play a role in the cost-benefit analysis proposed in rational choice theory.

In addition, the results of this study showed that the participants used some self-care strategies: leaving the job situation that induces corruption, continuous self-monitoring, and giving oneself an opportunity for reflection and not making premature decisions. An important contextual factor in administrative corruption is the corrupt atmosphere of the organization [27]. Therefore, leaving the situation contaminated with corruption can be a preventive strategy, which was also mentioned by some of our participants. The function of continuous self-monitoring in preventing administrative corruption can be explained through the slippery slope theory [13]. In the “slippery slope” hypothesis of corrupt behavior, small acts of corruption and crimes gradually lead to bigger ones. Therefore, the informants of the current study, using the continuous self-monitoring strategy, probably took special care of themselves so as not to enter this slippery slope. In addition, “giving oneself an opportunity for reflection and not making premature decisions” is another strategy that may help a person less likely to fall into the trap of heuristics. According to Rangone [17], rationality has a limited capacity to evaluate risks and possibilities and it may be guided by biases and heuristics. Therefore, it seems that deliberate and unhurried decision making can be considered as a way to avoid corruption.

5. Conclusions

Persistent corruption has been a long-standing challenge in Iran. Although the topic of corruption prevention has attracted a great deal of attention, existing research concerning micro-level factors is sparse. Our study among a group of public employees in Iran identified some of the potential individual and contextual factors contributing to administrative corruption prevention from the perspective of participants. Attempts were made to explain the results through relevant theories, logical arguments, and cultural components. In general, according to the findings of this research, it seems that if there is a financial need and also an opportunity to commit corruption, what can potentially help a person in self-control and self-restraint may be a set of psychological components (including cognitions, emotions, behavioral strategies, and personality traits) and some contextual factors (e.g., family context and organizational context).

This study is just a small attempt to identify and clarify the possible role of individual and contextual factors in the prevention of administrative corruption. The main strength of this research is that, to the researchers′ knowledge, this is the first comprehensive scientific study of its kind in Iran, which examines the perception of civil servants about individual and contextual factors that contribute to prevention of administrative corruption; also, a qualitative method was especially used to gain more insight into this phenomenon. This study, by discovering some of the factors associated with a group of public employees refraining from committing possible administrative corruption, may contribute to the enrichment of knowledge in the field of occupational fraud. Previous research concerning administrative corruption has often focused on the macro-aspect, and the micro-aspect (etiology focused on the individual perspective) is understudied. In the few existing studies, the participation of “perpetrators of corruption” has been used, and therefore, the approach of the present study in recruiting “nonperpetrators of corruption” as a research sample and adopting a positive and preventive point of view is innovative. Thus, since most studies focus on the factors that lead to corruption, the idea of examining the contextual and individual factors tied to corruption prevention and resistance to corruption is new. It is hoped that this study will help increase the depth and scope of the literature on phenomenology of corruption, administrative corruption management, and public sector ethics.

It should be noted that we never intend to reduce the phenomenon of (non-) involvement in corruption to personal-level processes, but such micro-level findings may, hopefully, serve as potential pieces of the multifaceted puzzle of corruption prevention. As a crucial point regarding macro-level determinants, it should not be overlooked that Iran currently faces a high level of economic inflation. Inflation can undermine not only the economic foundations but also the moral fabric of society. Just as one cannot expect greens and flowers to grow in dry and salty lands, individual improvement requires a conducive environment.

Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Disclosure

This work is the result of a doctoral dissertation completed by Saeid Zandi in fulfillment of Ph.D. requirements at Allameh Tabataba’i University.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Saeid Zandi and Masoumeh Esmaeili; data curation, Saeid Zandi; formal analysis, Saeid Zandi, Masoumeh Esmaeili, and Kumars Farahbakhsh; investigation, Saeid Zandi and Kumars Farahbakhsh; methodology, Saeid Zandi, Masoumeh Esmaeili, and Kumars Farahbakhsh; project administration, Saeid Zandi; resources, Saeid Zandi and Kumars Farahbakhsh; supervision, Masoumeh Esmaeili; writing–original draft, Saeid Zandi; and writing–review and editing, Saeid Zandi, Masoumeh Esmaeili, and Kumars Farahbakhsh.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for this study.