Cited by 900Cultural Differences and ValuesTeam Dynamics and PerformanceGlobal and Cross-Cultural Management

Social Loafing and Collectivism: A Comparison of the United States and the People's Republic of China

Earley, P. Christopher·1989·Administrative Science Quarterly

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2393567

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Earley, P. C.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Earley, P. Christopher
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1989-12
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
565
ISSN
0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139144705
Cited by
900
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 51
FWCI
5.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Global and Cross-Cultural Management
Keywords
social loafing, collectivism, United States, China, cross-cultural comparison, group performance, individualism-collectivism

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