Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,211

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Trainees' Attributes and Attitudes: Neglected Influences on Training Effectiveness

Noe, Raymond A.·1986·The Academy of Management Review

Abstract

Studies of the influence of trainees' characteristics on training effectiveness have focused on the level of ability necessary to learn program content. Motivational and environmental influences of training effectiveness have received little attention. This analysis integrates important motivational and situational factors from organizational behavior theory and research into a model which describes how trainees' attributes and attitudes may influence the effectiveness of training.

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 · 10.2307/258393

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

See all 1,211

Metadata

Authors
Noe, R. A.
Venue
The Academy of Management Review
Published
1986-10
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
736
ISSN
0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026689473
Cited by
1,211
References
5
FWCI
8.11
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

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.