Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 414

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

Research on Revision in Writing

Fitzgerald, Jill·1987·Review of Educational Research

Abstract

Views of revision and its role in writing have changed dramatically over the last two decades. This article first presents a historical perspective on revision and suggests a contemporary definition of revision. Next, it reviews research methods for examining revision. The evolving methods mirror the recent reconceptualization of revision by enabling investigation of the following: meaningful revision activity, not just editorial actions; the revision process as well as the revision products; and revision as it occurs at several points in writing. Findings from research on revision are synthesized, conclusions about the results are given, and limitations of the research are examined.

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 · 10.2307/1170433

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

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 2 references

Cited by

See all 414

Metadata

Authors
Fitzgerald, J.
Venue
Review of Educational Research
Published
1987
Volume
57
Issue
4
Pages
481
ISSN
0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164390622
Cited by
414
References
2
FWCI
20.40
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: Research on Revision in Writing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1170433
The paper
Fitzgerald, J. (1987). Research on Revision in Writing. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170433

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.