Eric Van den Steen

1.3k citations
19 papers · 842 · h-index 11

Impact in

Papers in

Eric Van den Steen

19 papers receiving 785 citations

Peers

Eric Van den Steen
Comparison fields: 5 of 67
  • General Decision Sciences 89
  • Accounting 345
  • Safety Research 172
  • Finance 192
  • Strategy and Management 168
Replace Florian Ederer with:
Florian Ederer United States
Ján Zábojník Canada
Robert A. Olsen United States
Oren Bar‐Gill United States
Jeffrey Hales United States
William S. Waller United States
Christine E. Earley United States
Eddy Cardinaels Netherlands
T. Jeffrey Wilks United States
Arnold Wright United States
Eric Van den Steen relative to Florian Ederer United States Florian Ederer's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Florian Ederer · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Eric Van den Steen

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Eric Van den Steen'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 Eric Van den Steen with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Eric Van den Steen more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Eric Van den Steen

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Eric Van den Steen. 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 Eric Van den Steen. The network helps show where Eric Van den Steen may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 1 scholars most cited alongside Eric Van den Steen, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Eric Van den Steen Line = papers co-authored together Eric Van den Steen links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

19 of 19 papers shown
#Work
1 2004307
2 2010163
3 2010110
4 201152
5 200946
6 200139
7 201731
8 200716
9 202114
10 201812
11 200612
12 20058
13 20138
14 20137
15 20026
16 20064
17 20123
18 20093
19
Interpersonal Authority in a Theory of the Firm Forthcoming in the American Economic Review
20091

About Eric Van den Steen

Eric Van den Steen is a scholar working on Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management, Safety Research, Management Science and Operations Research and Accounting, having authored 19 papers that have together received 842 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies (6 papers), Economic Theory and Institutions (6 papers), Economic theories and models (6 papers), Business Strategy and Innovation (5 papers), Game Theory and Applications (3 papers), Corporate Finance and Governance (3 papers), Innovation and Knowledge Management (3 papers) and Culture, Economy, and Development Studies (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in General Decision Sciences (89 citations), Accounting (345 citations), Safety Research (172 citations), Finance (192 citations) and Strategy and Management (168 citations). Eric Van den Steen has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Canada and Australia. Frequent co-authors include Deishin Lee. Their work appears in journals such as Management Science, American Economic Review, Strategy Science and SSRN Electronic Journal.

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