Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Consumer Market Behavior and PricingMerger and Competition AnalysisDigital Platforms and Economics

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

Standardization and the costs of assessing quality

Jones, Philip, Hudson, John·1996·European Journal of Political Economy
DOI 10.1016/0176-2680(95)00021-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0176-2680(95)00021-6

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

See all 65

Metadata

Authors
Jones, P., & Hudson, J.
Affiliations
University of Bath (GB)
Corresponding author
Jones, Philip
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Political Economy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-09
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
355-361
ISSN
0176-2680 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0176-2680(95)00021-6
OpenAlex
W2073483752
Cited by
65
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • European Journal of Political Economy (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Merger and Competition Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
Keywords
standardization, product quality, quality signals, consumer welfare, search costs, uncertainty, variance reduction, quality assessment, consumer effort

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: Standardization and the costs of assessing quality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0176-2680(95)00021-6
The paper
Jones, P., & Hudson, J. (1996). Standardization and the costs of assessing quality. European Journal of Political Economy. https://doi.org/10.1016/0176-2680(95)00021-6

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.