Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reactions to Employee Performance Monitoring: Framework, Review, and Research Directions

Stanton, Jeffrey M.·2000·Human Performance

Abstract

A conceptual framework is described for examining employee reactions to performance monitoring. The framework incorporates attitudinal and motivational effects of performance monitoring on monitored employees and discusses effects of performance monitoring on performance feedback and performance appraisal. The framework is used to organize a review of research literature relevant to employee reactions to electronic and nonelectronic performance monitoring. The article includes specific propositions for additional research and general directions for future research in performance monitoring.

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 · 10.1207/s15327043hup1301_4

Cites

87 of 87 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

Cites

Show all 87 references

Cited by

See all 310

Metadata

Authors
Stanton, J. M.
Venue
Human Performance
Published
2000-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
85-113
ISSN
  • 0895-9285 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7043
OpenAlex
W2054960224
Cited by
310
References
87
FWCI
22.25
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: Reactions to Employee Performance Monitoring: Framework, Review, and Research Directions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327043hup1301_4
The paper
Stanton, J. M. (2000). Reactions to Employee Performance Monitoring: Framework, Review, and Research Directions. Human Performance. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1301_4

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.