The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Expert judgment: Some necessary conditions and an example.
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
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Cited by
Explanations From Intelligent Systems: Theoretical Foundations and Implications for Practice1
Gregor, S., & Benbasat, I. (1999) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249487 · Cited by 535
A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions
DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. (1984) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(84)90029-1 · Cited by 444
Why study expert decision making? Some historical perspectives and comments
Shanteau, J., & Stewart, T. R. (1992) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(92)90057-e · Cited by 173
Psychological Characteristics of Expert Decision Makers
Shanteau, J. (1987) · Expert Judgment and Expert Systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-86679-1_16 · Cited by 102
Assessment of expert performance compared across professional domains.
Thomas, R. P., & Lawrence, A. (2018) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.03.009 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Einhorn, H. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 1974-10
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 562-571
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W1975482862
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.31
- 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
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.
