Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Comparative Study of Erotomanic and Obsessional Subjects in a Forensic Sample

Zona, MA, Sharma, KK, Lane, J·1993·Journal of Forensic Sciences

Abstract

Erotomania is the delusional belief that one is passionately loved by another. These persons often go to great lengths to approach their object of desire, often necessitating the attention of the law. We have reviewed a forensic sample to select subjects who meet criteria for the diagnosis of erotomania. Case histories from all of the case files of the Threat Management Unit of the Los Angeles Police Department were reviewed to compare erotomanic subjects with those who were suffering from other disorders. Various demographic and other relevant data were examined to determine if the erotomanic subjects presented similar or different profiles.

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 · 10.1520/jfs13486j

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.

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

Cited by

See all 286

Metadata

Authors
Zona, M., Sharma, K., & Lane, J.
Venue
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Published
1993-07-01
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
894-903
ISSN
0022-1198 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1658497311
Cited by
286
References
0
FWCI
6.38
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: A Comparative Study of Erotomanic and Obsessional Subjects in a Forensic Sample. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1520/jfs13486j
The paper
Zona, M., Sharma, K., & Lane, J. (1993). A Comparative Study of Erotomanic and Obsessional Subjects in a Forensic Sample. Journal of Forensic Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1520/jfs13486j

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.