Cited by 59Risk Perception and ManagementWastewater Treatment and ReuseEnvironmental Education and Sustainability

The common in-group identity model enhances communication about recycled water.

Schultz, Tracy, Fielding, Kelly·2014·Journal of Environmental Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.07.006

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • When a scientist provided information about recycled water and emphasized a shared social identity with participants, highly identified participants had greater support for this sustainable water source.

    “Schultz and Fielding (2014) showed that when a scientist provided information about recycled water—a potentially contentious solution to address water shortage situations—and emphasized the social identity she shared with participants (i.e., they all resided in a particular region), highly identified participants had greater support for this sustainable water source.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schultz, T., & Fielding, K.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Schultz, Tracy
Venue
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
40
Pages
296-305
ISSN
0272-4944 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2078255286
Cited by
59
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Environmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
Keywords
superordinate identity, risk perception, public acceptance, science communication, source credibility, personal identification, environmental attitudes

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