Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,589

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

Being Good or Being Known: An Empirical Examination of the Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences of Organizational Reputation

Open access
Rindova, Violina P., Williamson, Ian O., Petkova, Antoaneta P., Sever, Joy Marie·2005·Academy of Management Journal
DOI 10.5465/amj.2005.19573108
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We examined the extent to which organizations’ reputations encompass different types of stakeholders’ perceptions, which may have differential effects on economic outcomes. Specifically, we propose that reputation consists of two dimensions: (1) stakeholders’ perceptions of an organization as able to produce quality goods and (2) organizations’ prominence in the minds of stakeholders. We empirically examined the distinct antecedents and consequences of these two dimensions of reputation in the context of U.S. business schools. Results suggest that prominence, which derives from the choices of influential third parties vis-à-vis an organization, contributes significantly to the price premium associated with having a favorable reputation.

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 · 10.5465/amj.2005.19573108

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
2005-12
Volume
48
Issue
6
Pages
1033-1049
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
DOI
10.5465/amj.2005.19573108
OpenAlex
W2122006260
Cited by
1,589
References
5
FWCI
84.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.