Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Attachment and Relationship DynamicsImpact of Technology on AdolescentsSocial Power and Status Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social Network Influence on the Dyadic Relationship

RIDLEY, CARL A., AVERY, ARTHUR W.·1979·Social Exchange in Developing Relationships
DOI 10.1016/b978-0-12-143550-9.50014-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/b978-0-12-143550-9.50014-8

Cites

29 of 29 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Burns, T. A structural theory of value, decision-making, and social interaction. Paper read at the Symposium on “New Directions in Theoretical Anthropology,” Oswego, New York, May, 1972.

Cited by

See all 58

Metadata

Authors
RIDLEY, C. A., & AVERY, A. W.
Venue
Social Exchange in Developing Relationships
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
1979
Pages
223-246
DOI
10.1016/b978-0-12-143550-9.50014-8
OpenAlex
W2504186666
Cited by
58
References
29
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.83
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Elsevier eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
social networks, dyads, interpersonal influence

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

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.