Cited by 1,994Education, Achievement, and GiftednessMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation

Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different Are They Really?

Bong, Mimi, Skaalvik, Einar M.·2003·Educational Psychology Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1021302408382

Cites

138 of 138 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
Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Corresponding author
Bong, Mimi
Venue
Educational Psychology Review
Published
2003-03
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
1-40
ISSN
  • 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-336X
OpenAlex
W2119725812
Cited by
1,994
References
138
Citations by year
2026: 94 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 132 · 2023: 125 · 2022: 133 · 2021: 138 · 2020: 156 · 2019: 126 · 2018: 116 · 2017: 119 · 2016: 122 · 2015: 115 · 2014: 106 · 2013: 84 · 2012: 62
FWCI
29.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Keywords
academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, perceived competence, mastery experiences, social comparison, reflected appraisals, academic motivation, self-concept development

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