The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.
Analysis of Clinical Interviews: Foundations and model viability
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
Johnson, H. L. (2012) · The Journal of Mathematical Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.01.001 · Cited by 119
Johnson, H. L. (2015) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10649-014-9590-y · Cited by 58
Relational thinking: The bridge between arithmetic and algebra
Kızıltoprak, A. (2017) · lnternational Electronic Journal of Elementary Education · doi:10.26822/iejee.2017131893 · Cited by 38
“, “Why did you think that number is the right one?” and “Are other different numbers possible?” were directed to the students (Clement, 2000) for the purpose of defining equality, determining relational thinking skills and observing the development of these skills.”
BackgroundJohnson, H. L., & McClintock, E. (2018) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10649-017-9799-7 · Cited by 23
“In the second phase, which occurred the week following the lessons, 14 students participated in a clinical interview (Clement, 2000).”
BackgroundProspective elementary teachers’ claiming in responses to false generalizations
Yopp, D. A. (2015) · The Journal of Mathematical Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.06.003 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Clement, J. J.
- Venue
- ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst)
- Publisher
- University of Massachusetts Amherst
- Published
- 2000-04-01
- Pages
- 1-22
- OpenAlex
- W1571527402
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.56
- 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: Analysis of Clinical Interviews: Foundations and model viability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781410602725.ch20
- The paper
- Clement, J. J. (2000). Analysis of Clinical Interviews: Foundations and model viability. ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410602725.ch20
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.
