Cited by 258Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsMathematics Education and PedagogyMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving.

Sweller, John, Mawer, Robert F., Ward, Mark R.·1983·Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-3445.112.4.639

Cites

16 of 16 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

Show all 16 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sweller, J., Mawer, R. F., & Ward, M. R.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
Published
1983-12
Volume
112
Issue
4
Pages
639-661
ISSN
  • 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2222
OpenAlex
W1997788290
Cited by
258
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Keywords
mathematical problem solving, expertise development, expert performance, mathematics 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