The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Stimulated recall — An effective methodology for examining successful teaching in science
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This type of SR represents an effective qualitative method for educational researchers to gather implicit data and has been broadly practiced to investigate various teaching and learning occurrences, including teacher cognition, study strategies, and language learning (Meade and McMeniman, 1992;Van der Kleij et al., 2017;White et al., 2016;Sundberg et al., 2018;Martinelle, 2018;Cao et al., 2019;M”
From A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022 (2024) · cites this paper as Meade and McMeniman, 1992
In the citing paper
“This type of SR represents an effective qualitative method for educational researchers to gather implicit data and has been broadly practiced to investigate various teaching and learning occurrences, including teacher cognition, study strategies, and language learning (Meade and McMeniman, 1992;Van der Kleij et al., 2017;White et al., 2016;Sundberg et al., 2018;Martinelle, 2018;Cao et al., 2019;M”
From A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022 (2024) · cites this paper as Meade and McMeniman, 1992
In the citing paper
“Linguistics and teacher education are two fields that more frequently took advantage of SR as a teaching strategy beyond research methods (Meade and McMeniman, 1992;Geiger et al., 2016;Sanchez and Grimshaw, 2019).”
From A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022 (2024) · cites this paper as Meade and McMeniman, 1992
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Bajah, S.T. and Chidolue, M.E. (1991), ‘A Study of Teacher Behaviour in High School Biology Classes’,Studies in Educational Evaluation, 17, pp. 99–115. · doi:10.1016/s0191-491x(05)80111-7
- Bellack, A.A. and Davitz, J.L. (1963),The Language of the Classroom, Institute of Psychological Research, Teachers’ College, Columbia University, New York, Mimeo.
- Clark, C.M. and Peterson, P.L. (1986), ‘Teachers’ Thought Processes’, in M.C. Wittrock (ed.),Handbook of Research in Teaching (3rd. ed.), New York, Macmillan, pp. 255–296.
- Keith, M.J. (1988),Stimulated Recall and Teacher’s Thought Processes: A Critical Review of the Methodology and an Alternative Perspective. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Louisville, Kentucky.
- Meade, P., McMeniman, M., Wilson, J., Kanes, C. and Davey I. (1991),Towards Making Explicit the Implicit Knowledge of Effective Maths and Science Teachers — a Triangulated Methodology. Paper presented at the AARE Conference, Gold Coast, November.
- Parsons, J.M., Graham, N. and Honess, T. (1983), ‘A Teacher’s Implicit Model of How Children Learn’,British Educational Research Journal, 9(1), pp. 91–101. · doi:10.1080/0141192830090110
- Shulman, L.S. (1987), ‘Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of a New Reform’,Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), pp. 1–22. · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Wang, M., Tsai, C.-C., Liang, J.-C., & Spector, J. M. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02987-6 · Cited by 47
Zhai, X., Fang, Q., Dong, Y., Wei, Z., Yuan, J., Cacciolatti, L., & Yang, Y. (2018) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12284 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Meade, P., & McMeniman, M.
- Venue
- The Australian Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1992-12
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1-18
- ISSN
- 0311-6999
- 2210-5328
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
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.
