Keith L. Zabel

552 total citations
9 papers, 360 citations indexed

About

Keith L. Zabel is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management and Demography. According to data from OpenAlex, Keith L. Zabel has authored 9 papers receiving a total of 360 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 6 papers in Sociology and Political Science, 4 papers in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management and 3 papers in Demography. Recurrent topics in Keith L. Zabel's work include Social and Intergroup Psychology (4 papers), Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior (4 papers) and Retirement, Disability, and Employment (3 papers). Keith L. Zabel is often cited by papers focused on Social and Intergroup Psychology (4 papers), Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior (4 papers) and Retirement, Disability, and Employment (3 papers). Keith L. Zabel collaborates with scholars based in United States. Keith L. Zabel's co-authors include Jason L. Huang, Ann Marie Ryan, Boris B. Baltes, Jason R. Jones, Andrew N. Christopher, Pam Marek, Kevin T. Wynne and Michael A. Olson and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Applied Psychology, Personality and Individual Differences and Journal of Business and Psychology.

In The Last Decade

Keith L. Zabel

9 papers receiving 337 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Keith L. Zabel United States	6	152	132	104	74	55	9	360
Melanie E. Leuty United States	13	135 0.9×	137 1.0×	118 1.1×	86 1.2×	44 0.8×	27	455
Alexandra Ilie Romania	12	153 1.0×	127 1.0×	131 1.3×	91 1.2×	60 1.1×	21	350
Srinivas Ekkirala India	8	251 1.7×	136 1.0×	133 1.3×	82 1.1×	52 0.9×	11	371
Samuel Hanig Canada	6	244 1.6×	161 1.2×	154 1.5×	112 1.5×	48 0.9×	7	413
Xinhui Jiang China	7	192 1.3×	197 1.5×	58 0.6×	104 1.4×	37 0.7×	14	403
David Joseph Keating United States	3	221 1.5×	112 0.8×	131 1.3×	61 0.8×	60 1.1×	4	391
Jih‐Yu Mao China	12	239 1.6×	192 1.5×	102 1.0×	63 0.9×	44 0.8×	40	411
Ashley Elizabeth Hardin United States	6	226 1.5×	154 1.2×	118 1.1×	114 1.5×	77 1.4×	10	450
Tyler B Sabey United States	7	202 1.3×	119 0.9×	115 1.1×	28 0.4×	43 0.8×	9	355
Dan Ni China	13	204 1.3×	122 0.9×	92 0.9×	100 1.4×	50 0.9×	53	369

Countries citing papers authored by Keith L. Zabel

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Keith L. Zabel

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Keith L. Zabel. 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 Keith L. Zabel. The network helps show where Keith L. Zabel may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Keith L. Zabel

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Keith L. Zabel. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Keith L. Zabel 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 Keith L. Zabel. Keith L. Zabel is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

9 of 9 papers shown

1.

Zabel, Keith L., et al.. (2020). Who says what (and how) to whom: A multilevel approach to improving workplace bias training. Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 13(2). 230–235. 2 indexed citations

2.

Zabel, Keith L., et al.. (2017). Who is Aging Successfully at Work? A Latent Profile Analysis of Successful Agers and their Work Motives. Work Aging and Retirement. 4(2). 175–188. 10 indexed citations

3.

Zabel, Keith L., et al.. (2016). Theoretical Applications of the MODE Model to Law Enforcement Training and Interventions. Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 9(3). 604–611. 2 indexed citations

4.

Zabel, Keith L., et al.. (2016). Generational Differences in Work Ethic: Fact or Fiction?. Journal of Business and Psychology. 32(3). 301–315. 65 indexed citations

5.

Zabel, Keith L. & Boris B. Baltes. (2015). Workplace intervention effectiveness across the lifespan. 4 indexed citations

6.

Zabel, Keith L., et al.. (2015). The Importance of Workplace Motives in Understanding Work–Family Issues for Older Workers. Work Aging and Retirement. wav021–wav021. 28 indexed citations

7.

Huang, Jason L., et al.. (2013). Personality and adaptive performance at work: A meta-analytic investigation.. Journal of Applied Psychology. 99(1). 162–179. 180 indexed citations

8.

Christopher, Andrew N., Keith L. Zabel, Jason R. Jones, & Pam Marek. (2008). Protestant ethic ideology: Its multifaceted relationships with just world beliefs, social dominance orientation, and right-wing authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences. 45(6). 473–477. 34 indexed citations

9.

Christopher, Andrew N., Keith L. Zabel, & Jason R. Jones. (2008). Conscientiousness and Work Ethic Ideology. Journal of Individual Differences. 29(4). 189–198. 35 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