Cited by 27

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Love and Money: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Household Sorting and Inequality

Fernandez, R., Guner, N., Knowles, J.·2005·The Quarterly Journal of Economics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/0033553053327498

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Fernández, Guner, and Knowles (2005) show that the spousal correlation in years of schooling tends to be greater in countries where skill premia and income inequality are high.

    “Indeed, Fernández, Guner, and Knowles (2005) show that the spousal correlation in years of schooling tends to be greater in countries where skill premia and income inequality are high.”

    From Educational Inequality* (2022) · cites this paper as Fernández, Guner, and Knowles (2005)

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Fernandez, R., Guner, N., & Knowles, J.
Venue
The Quarterly Journal of Economics
Published
2005-02-01
Volume
120
Issue
1
Pages
273-344
ISSN
  • 0033-5533
  • 1531-4650
Cited by
27
References
2
Language
en

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