Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Multiple Correspondence Analysis and Related Methods
2006673 citationsMichael Greenacre, Jörg Blasius et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Jörg Blasius'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 Jörg Blasius with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jörg Blasius more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jörg Blasius. 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 Jörg Blasius. The network helps show where Jörg Blasius may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jörg Blasius
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jörg Blasius.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jörg Blasius 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 Jörg Blasius. Jörg Blasius 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.
Blasius, Jörg, Frédéric Lebaron, Brigitte Le Roux, & Andreas Schmitz. (2019). Empirical Investigations of Social Space. SPIRE - Sciences Po Institutional REpository.39 indexed citations
Blasius, Jörg, et al.. (2005). Abbrüche bei Online-Befragungen: Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Medizinern. Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 70–92.5 indexed citations
11.
Friedrichs, Jürgen & Jörg Blasius. (2001). Sozial-räumliche Integration von Türken in zwei Kölner Wohngebieten..2 indexed citations
12.
Blasius, Jörg & Karl-Heinz Reuband. (1995). Telefoninterviews in der empirischen Sozialforschung: Ausschöpfungsquoten und Antwortqualität. Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 64–87.3 indexed citations
Greenacre, Michael & Jörg Blasius. (1994). Correspondence analysis in the Social Sciences : recent developments and applications. Academic Press eBooks.213 indexed citations
Blasius, Jörg & Werner Georg. (1992). Clusteranalyse und Korrespondenzanalyse in der Lebensstilforschung: ein Vergleich am Beispiel der Wohnungseinrichtung. Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 112–133.2 indexed citations
17.
Blasius, Jörg & Jens S. Dangschat. (1990). Gentrification : die Aufwertung innenstadtnaher Wohnviertel. Campus eBooks.12 indexed citations
18.
Blasius, Jörg. (1988). Zur Stabilität von Ergebnissen bei der Korrespondenzanalyse. Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 47–62.1 indexed citations
19.
Blasius, Jörg. (1987). Einstellung zur Hamburger Innenstadt: eine Auswertung mit Hilfe der Korrespondenzanalyse. Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 29–51.1 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.