Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How power distance belief, self-construal, and relationship norms impact conspicuous consumption

Park, Sehoon, Kim, Chaeyeong, Park, Jane·2023·Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
DOI 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103518
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103518

Cites

65 of 65 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

1 retracted

Show all 65 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Aggarwal, 2006, The moderating effect of relationship norm salience on consumers' loss aversion, J. Consum. Psychol., 33, 413
  2. Bialas, 2009, Power distance as a determinant of relations between managers and employees in the enterprises with foreign capital, J. Intercult. Manag., 1, 105

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Park, S., Kim, C., & Park, J.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-11
Volume
75
Pages
103518
ISSN
0969-6989
DOI
10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103518
Cited by
22
References
65
Language
en
Licence

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.