CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 171Mentoring and Academic DevelopmentInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

Toward a conceptual model of mentoring research: Integration with self-regulated learning

Schunk, Dale H., Mullen, Carol A.·2013·Educational Psychology Review
DOI 10.1007/s10648-013-9233-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10648-013-9233-3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 125 · Cited by 171

Authors
Schunk, D. H., & Mullen, C. A.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
Corresponding author
Schunk, Dale H.
ORCID
Venue
Educational Psychology Review
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-06-25
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
361-389
ISSN
  • 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-336X
DOI
10.1007/s10648-013-9233-3
OpenAlex
W2086723564
Cited by
171
References
125
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
16.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
academic mentorship, student self-regulation, mentoring process, Protégé, mentors, theoretical integration, mentoring outcomes

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