Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 285

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Alternative Methods for Solving the Problem of Selection Bias in Evaluating the Impact of Treatments on Outcomes

Heckman, James J., Robb, Richard·1986·Drawing Inferences from Self-Selected Samples
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4612-4976-4_7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-1-4612-4976-4_7

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 285

Metadata

Authors
Heckman, J. J., & Robb, R.
Venue
Drawing Inferences from Self-Selected Samples
Publisher
Springer New York
Published
1986
Pages
63-107
DOI
10.1007/978-1-4612-4976-4_7
OpenAlex
W1807792373
Cited by
285
References
3
FWCI
17.51
Type
book chapter
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alternative Methods for Solving the Problem of Selection Bias in Evaluating the Impact of Treatments on Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-1-4612-4976-4_7
The paper
Heckman, J. J., & Robb, R. (1986). Alternative Methods for Solving the Problem of Selection Bias in Evaluating the Impact of Treatments on Outcomes. Drawing Inferences from Self-Selected Samples. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4976-4_7

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.