Diana C. Robertson

2.0k total citations
28 papers, 1.4k citations indexed

About

Diana C. Robertson is a scholar working on Information Systems and Management, Cognitive Neuroscience and Strategy and Management. According to data from OpenAlex, Diana C. Robertson has authored 28 papers receiving a total of 1.4k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 15 papers in Information Systems and Management, 9 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience and 7 papers in Strategy and Management. Recurrent topics in Diana C. Robertson's work include Ethics in Business and Education (15 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (8 papers) and Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies (5 papers). Diana C. Robertson is often cited by papers focused on Ethics in Business and Education (15 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (8 papers) and Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies (5 papers). Diana C. Robertson collaborates with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and China. Diana C. Robertson's co-authors include William T. Ross, Bodo B. Schlegelmilch, Erin Anderson, Nigel Nicholson, Talia Rymon, William S. Laufer, Thomas W. Dunfee, Sandy D. Jap, Ryan Hamilton and Aric Rindfleisch and has published in prestigious journals such as PLoS ONE, Journal of Marketing and NeuroImage.

In The Last Decade

Diana C. Robertson

28 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Diana C. Robertson United States 19 718 540 443 311 264 28 1.4k
Kenneth L. Kraft United States 13 943 1.3× 686 1.3× 370 0.8× 454 1.5× 216 0.8× 17 1.5k
Terry W. Loe United States 15 961 1.3× 277 0.5× 489 1.1× 383 1.2× 242 0.9× 33 1.4k
William E. Shafer United States 22 676 0.9× 511 0.9× 366 0.8× 222 0.7× 234 0.9× 39 1.6k
John Fraedrich United States 15 1.2k 1.7× 383 0.7× 490 1.1× 579 1.9× 395 1.5× 35 1.8k
Jamal Al‐Khatib United States 21 636 0.9× 231 0.4× 273 0.6× 331 1.1× 406 1.5× 40 1.3k
Gary M. Fleischman United States 17 593 0.8× 610 1.1× 668 1.5× 145 0.5× 258 1.0× 60 1.5k
Alejo José G. Sisón Spain 22 485 0.7× 304 0.6× 450 1.0× 186 0.6× 286 1.1× 59 1.4k
Gene Brown United States 22 878 1.2× 418 0.8× 793 1.8× 435 1.4× 472 1.8× 46 2.1k
Gael McDonald New Zealand 20 615 0.9× 246 0.5× 325 0.7× 168 0.5× 383 1.5× 46 1.3k
Joseph G. P. Paolillo United States 19 624 0.9× 367 0.7× 428 1.0× 317 1.0× 587 2.2× 44 1.8k

Countries citing papers authored by Diana C. Robertson

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Diana C. Robertson's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Diana C. Robertson with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Diana C. Robertson more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Diana C. Robertson

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Diana C. Robertson. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Diana C. Robertson. The network helps show where Diana C. Robertson may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Diana C. Robertson

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Diana C. Robertson. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Diana C. Robertson based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Diana C. Robertson. Diana C. Robertson is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Pan, Yu, Fujun Lai, Zhuo Fang, et al.. (2018). Risk choice and emotional experience: a multi-level comparison between active and passive decision-making. Journal of Risk Research. 22(10). 1239–1266. 16 indexed citations
2.
Fang, Zhuo, Wi Hoon Jung, Marc Korczykowski, et al.. (2017). Post-conventional moral reasoning is associated with increased ventral striatal activity at rest and during task. Scientific Reports. 7(1). 7105–7105. 15 indexed citations
3.
Jung, Wi Hoon, Kristin Prehn, Zhuo Fang, et al.. (2016). Moral competence and brain connectivity: A resting-state fMRI study. NeuroImage. 141. 408–415. 21 indexed citations
4.
Robertson, Diana C., Christian Voegtlin, & Thomas Maak. (2016). Business Ethics: The Promise of Neuroscience. Journal of Business Ethics. 144(4). 679–697. 40 indexed citations
5.
Prehn, Kristin, Marc Korczykowski, Hengyi Rao, et al.. (2015). Neural Correlates of Post-Conventional Moral Reasoning: A Voxel-Based Morphometry Study. PLoS ONE. 10(6). e0122914–e0122914. 29 indexed citations
6.
Gilkey, Roderick W., Ricardo Cáceda, Andrew Bate, Diana C. Robertson, & Clint Kilts. (2015). Using the Whole Brain to Improve Strategic Reasoning. ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania). 1. 2 indexed citations
7.
Rindfleisch, Aric, Kersi D. Antia, Janet Bercovitz, et al.. (2010). Transaction costs, opportunism, and governance: Contextual considerations and future research opportunities. Marketing Letters. 21(3). 211–222. 70 indexed citations
8.
Ross, William T. & Diana C. Robertson. (2007). Compound Relationships between Firms. Journal of Marketing. 71(3). 108–123. 76 indexed citations
9.
Ross, William T. & Diana C. Robertson. (2000). Lying: The Impact of Decision Context. Business Ethics Quarterly. 10(2). 409–440. 71 indexed citations
10.
Graddy, Kathryn & Diana C. Robertson. (1999). Fairness of Pricing Decisions. Business Ethics Quarterly. 9(2). 225–243. 7 indexed citations
11.
Graddy, Kathryn & Diana C. Robertson. (1999). Fairness of Pricing Decisions. Business Ethics Quarterly. 9(2). 225–243. 1 indexed citations
12.
Laufer, William S. & Diana C. Robertson. (1997). Corporate Ethics Initiatives As Social Control. Journal of Business Ethics. 16(10). 1029–1047. 70 indexed citations
13.
Robertson, Diana C., et al.. (1996). Professional Development: the Individual Perspective. Business Strategy Review. 7(4). 21–26. 5 indexed citations
14.
Schlegelmilch, Bodo B. & Diana C. Robertson. (1995). The influence of Country and Industry on Ethical Perceptions of Senior Executives in the U.S. and Europe. Journal of International Business Studies. 26(4). 859–881. 117 indexed citations
15.
Robertson, Diana C. & William T. Ross. (1995). Decision-Making Processes on Ethical Issues: The Impact of a Social Contract Perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly. 5(2). 213–240. 37 indexed citations
16.
Robertson, Diana C.. (1993). Empiricism in business ethics: Suggested research directions. Journal of Business Ethics. 12(8). 585–599. 142 indexed citations
17.
Robertson, Diana C. & Bodo B. Schlegelmilch. (1993). Corporate institutionalization of ethics in the United States and Great Britain. Journal of Business Ethics. 12(4). 301–312. 51 indexed citations
18.
Robertson, Diana C. & N. Craig Smith. (1992). Morality and the Market: Consumer Pressure for Corporate Accountability.. Administrative Science Quarterly. 37(3). 510–510. 3 indexed citations
19.
Dunfee, Thomas W. & Diana C. Robertson. (1988). Integrating ethics into the business school curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics. 7(11). 847–859. 60 indexed citations
20.
Dunfee, Thomas W. & Diana C. Robertson. (1984). Work-Related Ethical Attitudes. Business and Professional Ethics Journal. 3(2). 25–40. 4 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026