Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 347

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DISAGGREGATING THE AGENCY CONTRACT: THE EFFECTS OF MONITORING, INCENTIVE ALIGNMENT, AND TERM IN OFFICE ON AGENT DECISION MAKING.

TOSI, H. L., KATZ, J. P., GOMEZ-MEJIA, L. R.·1997·Academy of Management Journal
DOI 10.2307/257054
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Using a laboratory design, we examined the simple and interactive effects of monitoring and incentive alignment on managerial decisions. Length of term in office was a third independent variable. R...

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 · 10.2307/257054

Cites

40 of 40 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 40 references

Cited by

See all 347

Metadata

Authors
TOSI, H. L., KATZ, J. P., & GOMEZ-MEJIA, L. R.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
1997-06-01
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
584-602
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
DOI
10.2307/257054
OpenAlex
W1979682775
Cited by
347
References
40
FWCI
14.63
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: DISAGGREGATING THE AGENCY CONTRACT: THE EFFECTS OF MONITORING, INCENTIVE ALIGNMENT, AND TERM IN OFFICE ON AGENT DECISION MAKING. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/257054
The paper
TOSI, H. L., KATZ, J. P., & GOMEZ-MEJIA, L. R. (1997). DISAGGREGATING THE AGENCY CONTRACT: THE EFFECTS OF MONITORING, INCENTIVE ALIGNMENT, AND TERM IN OFFICE ON AGENT DECISION MAKING. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/257054

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.