The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Essence of Decision
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
Cited by
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556620 · Cited by 4,020
Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492 · Cited by 2,374
The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations
Barnett, M. N., & Finnemore, M. (1999) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/002081899551048 · Cited by 2,113
The New Economics of Organization
Moe, T. M. (1984) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2110997 · Cited by 1,974
Metadata
- Authors
- Bernstein, B. J., Allison, G., & Zelikow, P.
- Venue
- Foreign Policy
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1999
- Issue
- 114
- Pages
- 121
- ISSN
- 0015-7228 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2796592583
- Cited by
- 967
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 168.43
- 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: Essence of Decision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1149596
- The paper
- Bernstein, B. J., Allison, G., & Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of Decision. Foreign Policy. https://doi.org/10.2307/1149596
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.
