Cited by 44Memory Processes and InfluencesDeception detection and forensic psychologyFace Recognition and Perception

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contamination of facial memory through exposure to misleading composite pictures.

Jenkins, Felicity, Davies, Graham·1985·Journal of Applied Psychology

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.70.1.164

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 44

Metadata

Authors
Jenkins, F., & Davies, G.
Affiliations
University of Aberdeen (GB)
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Published
1985-02
Volume
70
Issue
1
Pages
164-176
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
OpenAlex
W1996393325
Cited by
44
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
face memory, memory contamination, face recognition (cognition), eyewitness memory

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