The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Critical Issues in Social Justice · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4 · Cited by 6,585
Participation and Democratic Theory
Pateman, C. (1970) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511720444 · Cited by 6,159
4 What Is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software
O’Reilly, T. (2012) · The Social Media Reader · doi:10.18574/nyu/9780814764077.003.0008 · Cited by 5,601
Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-3597 · Cited by 5,186
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · doi:10.1515/9781400828609 · Cited by 5,156
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600 · Cited by 4,760
The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom
Benkler, Y. (2017) · Yale University Press eBooks · doi:10.12987/9780300127232 · Cited by 3,680
Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-6933 · Cited by 3,367
Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-1165 · Cited by 2,937
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-1645 · Cited by 2,925
Cited by
Bonsón, E., Royo, S., & Ratkai, M. (2015) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2014.11.001 · Cited by 503
Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research
Berrang-Ford, L., Pearce, T., & Ford, J. D. (2015) · Regional Environmental Change · doi:10.1007/s10113-014-0708-7 · Cited by 474
Being smart: Emerging technologies and innovation in the public sector
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2014.09.001 · Cited by 354
Evaluating the use and impact of Web 2.0 technologies in local government
Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2015) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.004 · Cited by 152
Liu, H. K., Tang, M., & Collard, A. S. J. (2025) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2024.102006 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Nam, T.
- Venue
- Government Information Quarterly
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 12-20
- ISSN
- 0740-624X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2032326839
- Cited by
- 368
- References
- 76
- FWCI
- 144.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.giq.2011.07.005
- The paper
- Nam, T. (2012). Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Government Information Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.07.005
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.