The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The Too-Much-of-a-Good-Thing Effect in Management
Pierce, J. R., & Aguinis, H. (2013) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206311410060 · Cited by 1,085
Narrative and the Cultural Psychology of Identity
Hammack, P. L. (2008) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868308316892 · Cited by 923
The Validity of Idiographic Research Explanations
Tsoukas, H. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258558 · Cited by 788
Theory as method: small theories of treatments
Lipsey, M. W. (1993) · New Directions for Program Evaluation · doi:10.1002/ev.1637 · Cited by 322
Integrating the social and natural sciences in environmental research: a discussion paper
Strang, V. (2009) · Environment Development and Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s10668-007-9095-2 · Cited by 107
Metadata
- Authors
- Holy, L., Fiske, D. W., & Shweder, R. A.
- Venue
- Man
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1988-03
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 205
- ISSN
- 0025-1496 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2796326095
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 63.05
- 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: Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2803087
- The paper
- Holy, L., Fiske, D. W., & Shweder, R. A. (1988). Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities. Man. https://doi.org/10.2307/2803087
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.
