Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 290

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Truly Poor: Direct and Indirect Consensual Measurement of Poverty in Sweden

Halleröd, Björn·1995·Journal of European Social Policy

Abstract

The analysis presented in this article is based on two different concepts of poverty; the direct consensual definition developed by Mack and Lansley (1985) and the indirect consensual definition established by Godehart et al (1977). The distinction between indirect and direct definitions of poverty is well establtshed within the field of poverty research. However, it is argued here that the usefulness of this dividing line can be questioned both at a theor etical and an empirical level.

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 · 10.1177/095892879500500203

Cites

1 of 1 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

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

Metadata

Authors
Halleröd, B.
Venue
Journal of European Social Policy
Published
1995-05
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
111-129
ISSN
  • 0958-9287 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7269
OpenAlex
W2076499002
Cited by
290
References
1
FWCI
13.21
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: The Truly Poor: Direct and Indirect Consensual Measurement of Poverty in Sweden. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/095892879500500203
The paper
Halleröd, B. (1995). The Truly Poor: Direct and Indirect Consensual Measurement of Poverty in Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy. https://doi.org/10.1177/095892879500500203

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.