Cited by 315Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal and Plant Science EducationRangeland and Wildlife Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Public perceptions of predators, particularly the wolf and coyote

Kellert, Stephen R.·1985·Biological Conservation

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0006-3207(85)90047-3

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 314

Metadata

Authors
Kellert, S. R.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Kellert, Stephen R.
Venue
Biological Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1985
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
167-189
ISSN
0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2070941443
Cited by
315
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
FWCI
2.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Biological Conservation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Animal and Plant Science Education
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Keywords
wolf, coyote, livestock farmers, cattle farmers, sheep producers, trappers, animal knowledge, demographic differences in attitudes, attitudes toward animals, predator control, species preference

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