The DOI matches its Crossref record.
'Til death do we part: Effects of mortality salience on romantic relationship factors: (634112013-651)
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
Mortality salience enhances commitment to romantic relationships.
“Indeed, studies have found that MS bolsters striving for romantic intimacy [41], enhances commitment to romantic relationships [42,43], and leads to endorsements of romantic and selfless relationship partners and styles of love [44].”
From An Appreciative View of the Brighter Side of Terror Management Processes (2015) · cites this paper as [43]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
When Death is Good for Life: Considering the Positive Trajectories of Terror Management
Vail, K. E., Juhl, J., Arndt, J., Vess, M., Routledge, C., & Rutjens, B. T. (2012) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868312440046 · Cited by 210
An Appreciative View of the Brighter Side of Terror Management Processes
Vail, III, & Juhl, J. (2015) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci4041020 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Blankmeyer, K., Hackathorn, J., Bequette, A. W., & Clark, E. M.
- Venue
- PsycEXTRA Dataset
- Published
- 2011
- OpenAlex
- W4240568108
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
- Type
- dataset
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- PsycEXTRA Dataset (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
- Keywords
- mortality salience, romantic relationships, death awareness, relationship factors, fear of death
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
