The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Journalists' Attitudes toward New Religious Movements
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Sociologists James T. Richardson and Barend van Driel (1997: 124) conducted a survey of religion correspondents, asking their opinion on various religious groups. Not surprisingly, opinion of NRMs was predominately negative.”
From Where Do They Get These Ideas? Changing Ideas of Cults in the Mirror of Popular Culture (2013) · cites this paper as Richardson and van Driel 1997: 124
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Where Do They Get These Ideas? Changing Ideas of Cults in the Mirror of Popular Culture
Laycock, J. (2013) · Journal of the American Academy of Religion · doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfs091 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Richardson, J. T., & van Driel, B.
- ORCID
- Richardson, James T.
- Venue
- Review of Religious Research
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 116
- ISSN
- 0034-673X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2476139185
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Review of Religious Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Journalism and Media Studies
- Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Religion and Society Interactions
- Keywords
- journalists' attitudes, new religious movements, media coverage of religion, Religious journalism
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
