The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Instrument Development in the Affective Domain: School and Corporate Applications
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
Cited by
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 · Cited by 5,925
“turning individual items into a harmonious and measuring construct, consists of (3) pre-testing questions, (4) sampling and survey administration, (5) item reduction, and (6) extraction of latent factors.”
BackgroundThe multidimensional existential meaning scale: a tripartite approach to measuring meaning in life
George, L. S., & Park, C. L. (2017) · The Journal of Positive Psychology · doi:10.1080/17439760.2016.1209546 · Cited by 379
Theoretical Considerations and Development of a Questionnaire to Measure Trust in Automation
Körber, M. (2019) · Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96074-6_2 · Cited by 317
Theoretical considerations and development of a questionnaire to measure trust in automation
Körber, M. (2018) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/nfc45 · Cited by 71
Metadata
- Authors
- McCoach, D. B., Gable, R. K., & Madura, J. P.
- Venue
- Springer eBooks
- Publisher
- Springer New York
- Published
- 2013
- OpenAlex
- W4298170291
- Cited by
- 360
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.42
- Type
- book
- 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: Instrument Development in the Affective Domain: School and Corporate Applications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-1-4614-7135-6
- The paper
- McCoach, D. B., Gable, R. K., & Madura, J. P. (2013). Instrument Development in the Affective Domain: School and Corporate Applications. Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7135-6
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.
