Cited by 838Organizational Learning and LeadershipManagement and Organizational StudiesInnovation and Knowledge Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Organizational Memory

Walsh, James P., Ungson, Gerardo Rivera·1991·The Academy of Management Review

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/258607

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 838

Metadata

Authors
Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R.
Venue
The Academy of Management Review
Published
1991-01
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
57
ISSN
0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4234893036
Cited by
835
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 127 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 36
FWCI
9.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Academy of Management Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Learning and Leadership
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
institutional memory, knowledge retention, organizational learning, knowledge management

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