Predictors of self-efficacy for cognitive ability employment testing
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Maertz et al. (2005) found self-efficacy differences between genders but not ethnicities.
“Maertz et al. (2005) found self-efficacy differences between genders but not ethnicities.”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Maertz et al. (2005)
Cites
Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797 · Cited by 8,181 · see citing works
Self-efficacy: implications for organizational behavior and human resource management
Gist, M. E. (1987) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1987.4306562 · Cited by 1,447 · see citing works
Chan, D. (1997) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.311 · Cited by 100 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Blacks were not more likely than other groups to perceive ability testing as unfair or invalid, contrary to some earlier findings where SE was not controlled (Chan, 1997; Chan et al., 1997; Schmit and Ryan, 1997).”
Result
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review
Cuppello, S., Zibarras, L. D., & Corr, P. J. (2025) · Trends in Psychology · doi:10.1007/s43076-025-00504-5
- Authors
- Maertz, C. P., Bauer, T. N., Mosley, D. C., Posthuma, R. A., & Campion, M. A.
- Affiliations
- Mississippi State University (US)
- Portland State University (US)
- University of South Alabama (US)
- The University of Texas at El Paso (US)
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- Corresponding author
- Maertz, Carl P.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 160-167
- ISSN
- 0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2102996578
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Business Research (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Keywords
- self-efficacy, cognitive ability testing, employment testing, job applicants, test failure, gender differences, racial differences
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
