Open Access
SHS Web of Conf.
Volume 187, 2024
2023 2nd International Conference on Educational Science and Social Culture (ESSC 2023)
Article Number 03015
Number of page(s) 7
Section Humanities and Public Service Management
Published online 20 March 2024
  1. A. Applebee, J. Langer, The national study of writing instruction: Methods and procedures. Albany, NY: Center on English Learning & Achievement (2011). [Google Scholar]
  2. D. H. Schunk, B. J. Zimmerman, Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self- regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading & Writing Quarterly 23, 1 (2007). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Z. Zong, C. D. Schunn, Does matching peers at finer-grained levels of prior performance enhance gains in task performance from peer review?. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 18, 3 (2023). [Google Scholar]
  4. Y. Zou, C. D. Schunn, Y. Wang, F. Zhang, Student attitudes that predict participation in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 43, 5 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  5. K. Topping, Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 68, 3 (1998). [Google Scholar]
  6. H. Li, Y. Xiong, C. V. Hunter, X. Guo, R. Tywoniw, Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45, 2 (2020). [Google Scholar]
  7. M. Matsuo, M. Aihara, Effect of a community of practice on knowledge sharing across boundaries: the mediating role of learning goals. Journal of knowledge management, 26, 1 (2022). [Google Scholar]
  8. M. M. Patchan, C. D. Schunn, R. J. Clark, Accountability in peer assessment: Examining the effects of reviewing grades on peer ratings and peer feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 43, 12 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  9. Z. Zong, C. D. Schunn, Y. Wang, Do experiences of interactional inequality predict lower depth of future student participation in peer review?. Computers in Human Behavior(2022). [Google Scholar]
  10. . S. Mustafa, W. Zhang, M. M. Naveed, What motivates online community contributors to contribute consistently? A case study on Stackoverflow netizens. Current Psychology 42, 13 (2023). [Google Scholar]
  11. . W. Wu, X. Gong, Motivation and sustained participation in the online crowdsourcing community: the moderating role of community commitment. Internet Research 31, 1 (2021). [Google Scholar]
  12. . F. Liu, D. Carless, Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education 11, 3 (2006). [Google Scholar]
  13. K. S. Double, J. A. McGrane, T. N. Hopfenbeck, The impact of peer assessment on academic performance: A meta-analysis of control group studies. Educational Psychology Review 32 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  14. A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review 84, 2 (1977). [Google Scholar]
  15. . J. S. Coleman, Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology 94 (1988). [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. C. M. Chiu, M. H. Hsu, E. T. Wang, Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision support systems 42, 3 (2006). [Google Scholar]
  17. . R. Cropanzano, M. S. Mitchell, Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of management 31, 6 (2005). [Google Scholar]
  18. . J. Jin, Y. Li, X. Zhong, L. Zhai, Why users contribute knowledge to online communities: An empirical study of an online social Q&A community. Information & management 52, 7 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  19. B. Badura, Social networks and the quality of life. The Quality of Urban Life: Social, Psychological, and Physical Conditions (1986). [Google Scholar]
  20. . M. M. Wasko, S. Faraj, Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS quarterly (2005). [Google Scholar]
  21. G. W. Bock, R. W. Zmud, Y. G. Kim, J. N. Lee, Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS quarterly (2005). [Google Scholar]
  22. A. Honarpour, A. Jusoh, C. S. Long, Knowledge management and total quality management: a reciprocal relationship. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 34, 1 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  23. H. Rui, A. Whinston, Information or attention? An empirical study of user contribution on Twitter. Information Systems and e-Business management, 10 (2012). [Google Scholar]
  24. Y. Sun, X. Zhou, A. Jeyaraj, R. A. Shang, F. Hu, The impact of enterprise social media platforms on knowledge sharing: An affordance lens perspective. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 32, 2 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  25. T. Akram, S. Lei, M. J. Haider, S. T. Hussain, The impact of organizational justice on employee innovative work behavior: Mediating role of knowledge sharing. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 5, 2 (2020). [Google Scholar]
  26. R. Rauniar, G. Rawski, S. Morgan, S. Mishra, Knowledge integration in IPPD project: role of shared project mission, mutual trust, and mutual influence. International Journal of Project Management 37, 2 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  27. W. Gardner, E. P. Mulvey, E. C. Shaw, Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychological bulletin 118, 3 (1995). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.