The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
General self‐efficacy and self‐esteem: toward theoretical and empirical distinction between correlated self‐evaluations
Abstract
To test whether general self‐efficacy and self‐esteem relate differently to motivational and affective constructs, we collected data from samples in academic and work settings. Results suggest that general self‐efficacy is more highly related to motivational variables than is self‐esteem, whereas self‐esteem is more highly related to affective variables than is general self‐efficacy, as hypothesized. Furthermore, results support the notion that motivational and affective states differentially mediate the relationships of general self‐efficacy and self‐esteem with task performance. These results confirm the theoretical distinction between general self‐efficacy and self‐esteem and suggest that failure to distinguish between them might exact a price in terms of precision, validity, and understanding of determinants of performance. Implications for research and practice in organizations are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · Cited by 32,433
Society and the Adolescent Self-Image
Rosenberg, M. (1965) · doi:10.1515/9781400876136 · Cited by 30,126
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 · Cited by 16,280
THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYSIS
BARRICK, M. R., & MOUNT, M. K. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x · Cited by 8,689
Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Mslq)
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1993) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164493053003024 · Cited by 3,646
Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach.
Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.309 · Cited by 3,078
Resilience in the Face of Catastrophe: Optimism, Personality, and Coping in the Kosovo Crisis
Riolli, L., Savicki, V., & Cepani, A. (2002) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02765.x · Cited by 2,166
Cited by
Entrepreneurial Self–Efficacy: Refining the Measure
McGee, J. E., Peterson, M., Mueller, S. L., & Sequeira, J. M. (2009) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00304.x · Cited by 1,318
The making of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire.
Duncan, T. G., & McKeachie, W. J. (2005) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4002_6 · Cited by 1,024
The impact of an entrepreneurship education program on entrepreneurial competencies and intention
Sánchez, J. C. (2013) · Journal of Small Business Management · doi:10.1111/jsbm.12025 · Cited by 676
Self-esteem development from age 14 to 30 years: A longitudinal study.
Erol, R. Y., & Orth, U. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0024299 · Cited by 474
Measuring General Self-Efficacy: A Comparison of Three Measures Using Item Response Theory
Scherbaum, C. A., Cohen-Charash, Y., & Kern, M. J. (2006) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164406288171 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-03-30
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 375-395
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W2047655759
- Cited by
- 548
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 11.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
