Cited by 69Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionBullying, Victimization, and AggressionPsychological Testing and Assessment

Construct validity of Williams' ostracism needs threat scale

Gerber, J.P., Chang, Si-Hua, Reimel, Hannah·2017·Personality and Individual Differences

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2016.07.008

Cites

18 of 18 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
Gerber, J. P., Chang, S.-H., & Reimel, H.
Affiliations
Gordon College (US)
Corresponding author
Gerber, J.P.
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-09
Volume
115
Pages
50-53
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2482297273
Cited by
69
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2
FWCI
6.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
ostracism, Cyberball, psychological needs, construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, factor structure, inclusion and exclusion, social exclusion

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