Cited by 1,717Education, Achievement, and GiftednessSchool Choice and PerformanceCareer Development and Diversity

The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis

Wigfield, Allan, Eccles, Jacquelynne S·1992·Developmental Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-p

Cites

94 of 94 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 100 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S.
Affiliations
University of Colorado System (US)
Corresponding author
Wigfield, Allan
Venue
Developmental Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1992-09
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
265-310
ISSN
0273-2297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2069393304
Cited by
1,717
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 119 · 2019: 94 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 90 · 2014: 77 · 2013: 75 · 2012: 87
FWCI
8.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Developmental Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
achievement values, expectancy-value theory, achievement goals, academic year, elementary school, secondary schools

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