The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impression Management in the Feedback-Seeking Process: A Literaturereview and Research Agenda
Abstract
Although impression management in the Feedback-seeking process has emerged as an important research topic, existing research has failed to capture the range and complexity of impression management behaviors. This article provides a theoretical framework for existing and future research. It examines how impression management sometimes discourages and at other times encourages feedback inquiry, and it explains the impact that impression management has on when, from whom, and how individuals ask for feedback. Organizational implications of the impression management motive in feedback seeking are discussed.
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
Cites
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Naegele, K. D., & Goffman, E. (1956) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089106 · Cited by 25,991
Advances In Experimental Social Psychology
(2022) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(22)x0002-6 · Cited by 22,259
The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life
Goffman, E. (2023) · Social Theory Re-Wired · doi:10.4324/9781003320609-59 · Cited by 17,562
The Social Psychology of Organizations.
Hackman, J. R., Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2989929 · Cited by 12,235
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 10,899
Research in Organizational Behavior
Hammer, E. R., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258300 · Cited by 10,806
Journal of personality and social psychology
Armstrong, J. S. (1988) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(88)90126-4 · Cited by 10,485
Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7 · Cited by 8,962
McClelland, D. C. (1961) · doi:10.1037/14359-000 · Cited by 4,998
Ireland, R. D., Elfring, T., & Hmieleski, K. M. (2011) · In Search of Research Excellence · doi:10.4337/9781849807630.00017 · Cited by 4,553
Cited by
Proactive Behavior in Organizations
Crant, J. M. (2000) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920630002600304 · Cited by 2,701
The dynamics of proactivity at work
Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.002 · Cited by 2,057
A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review
Okoli, C. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03743 · Cited by 1,413
De Bakker, F. G. A., Groenewegen, P., & Den Hond, F. (2005) · Business & Society · doi:10.1177/0007650305278086 · Cited by 1,085
Voorhees, C. M., Fombelle, P. W., Gregoire, Y., Bone, S., Gustafsson, A., Sousa, R., & Walkowiak, T. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.04.014 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- Morrison, E. W., & Bies, R. J.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 1991-07
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 522-541
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W2094492235
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 59
- FWCI
- 10.12
- 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: Impression Management in the Feedback-Seeking Process: A Literaturereview and Research Agenda. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amr.1991.4279472
- The paper
- Morrison, E. W., & Bies, R. J. (1991). Impression Management in the Feedback-Seeking Process: A Literaturereview and Research Agenda. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279472
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.
