Cited by 134Disaster Management and ResilienceEarthquake and Disaster Impact StudiesPublic Relations and Crisis Communication

The impact of disaster education on public preparation and mitigation for earthquakes: a cross-country comparison between Fukui, Japan and the San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA

Tanaka, Kazuko·2005·Applied Geography

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apgeog.2005.07.001

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tanaka, K.
Affiliations
Kyoto University (JP)
Corresponding author
Tanaka, Kazuko
Venue
Applied Geography
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-07
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
201-225
ISSN
0143-6228 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047372572
Cited by
134
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Geography (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Earthquake and Disaster Impact Studies
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
Keywords
disaster education, earthquake preparedness, earthquake disaster mitigation, cross-national comparison, San Francisco Bay Area, educational sources

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