Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 333

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

PEER REPORTING OF UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR: A SOCIAL CONTEXT PERSPECTIVE.

Trevino, L. K., Victor, B.·1992·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

This research hypothesized that two social context conditions influence group members' evaluations of peer reporting of unethical behavior and their own inclination to report peers: the misconduct threatens the interests of group members and peer reporting is denned as a role responsibility of group members. Two scenario studies provided mixed support for the hypotheses, results differing in the two hypothetical settings. In both studies, however, when subjects perceived a peer reporter as highly ethical, they simultaneously evaluated him or her as unlikable. Results of a field survey provided some support for the generalizability of the findings to an actual work setting.

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 · 10.2307/256472

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 333

Metadata

Authors
Trevino, L. K., & Victor, B.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
1992-03-01
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
38-64
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W2314461516
Cited by
333
References
2
FWCI
17.56
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: PEER REPORTING OF UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR: A SOCIAL CONTEXT PERSPECTIVE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/256472
The paper
Trevino, L. K., & Victor, B. (1992). PEER REPORTING OF UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR: A SOCIAL CONTEXT PERSPECTIVE. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/256472

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.