The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review.
Abstract
The claim that appropriate "after-event review (AER)" may increase the relative value of drawing lessons from successes, as compared with failures, was examined in the present study. The study was a laboratory experiment in which the effect of type of AER (failure-focused, success-focused, failure- and success-focused, and no AER review) on performance improvement and causal attributions was tested under conditions of earlier success and earlier failure. In general, 2 results were demonstrated: (a) Drawing lessons from successful experience is feasible, and its effectiveness is contingent upon the type of AER. More specifically, after successful events, the most effective review is that of wrong actions, whereas after failed events, any kind of event review (correct or wrong actions) is effective. (b) AERs elicit more internal (as opposed to external) and specific (as opposed to general) attributions. These 2 classifications moderate the effect of AERs on task performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion
Weiner, B. (1985) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.92.4.548 · Cited by 7,846
Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705 · Cited by 7,766
Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation.
Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-843x.87.1.49 · Cited by 7,121
From acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60107-0 · Cited by 3,424
A Relational Model of Authority in Groups
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60283-x · Cited by 2,977
Cited by
Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention
Yukl, G. (2012) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2012.0088 · Cited by 1,264
Jones, K. J., Crowe, J., Allen, J. A., Skinner, A. M., High, R., Kennel, V., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2019) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4453-y · Cited by 28
Becker, F., Wirzberger, M., Pammer-Schindler, V., Srinivas, S., & Lieder, F. (2023) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/jdm.2023.16 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Ellis, S., Mendel, R., & Nir, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 669-680
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W1997466229
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 6.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.669
- The paper
- Ellis, S., Mendel, R., & Nir, M. (2006). Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.669
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
