Cited by 65Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionForgiveness and Related BehaviorsSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Terror Management and Trait Empathy: Evidence that Mortality Salience Promotes Reactions of Forgiveness among People with High (vs. low) Trait Empathy

Schimel, Jeff, Wohl, Michael J. A., Williams, Todd·2006·Motivation and Emotion

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11031-006-9040-y

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schimel, J., Wohl, M. J. A., & Williams, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Carleton University (CA)
Corresponding author
Schimel, Jeff
Venue
Motivation and Emotion
Published
2006-10-04
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
214-224
ISSN
  • 0146-7239 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6644
OpenAlex
W2017942850
Cited by
65
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Motivation and Emotion (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Forgiveness and Related Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
terror management theory, mortality salience, trait empathy, forgiveness, in-group favoritism, intergroup relations, prosocial behavior, dental pain, violent offenders

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