Cited by 82Sport Psychology and PerformanceMotor Control and AdaptationSports and Physical Education Research

Enhanced expectancies facilitate golf putting

Palmer, Kimberly, Chiviacowsky, Suzete, Wulf, Gabriele·2016·Psychology of Sport and Exercise

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.009

Cites

40 of 40 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

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palmer, K., Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
  • Universidade Federal de Pelotas (BR)
Corresponding author
Wulf, Gabriele
Venue
Psychology of Sport and Exercise
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
22
Pages
229-232
ISSN
1469-0292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1424059843
Cited by
82
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3
FWCI
12.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychology of sport and exercise (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
Keywords
expectancy, golf putting, motor learning, performance standards, task difficulty, skill retention, skill transfer, motor skill learning

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