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.
The Extended Transportation-Imagery Model: A Meta-Analysis of the Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers' Narrative Transportation
2013682 citationsTom van Laer, Ko de Ruyter et al.Journal of Consumer Researchprofile →
Linking perceived service quality and service loyalty: a multi‐dimensional perspective
1999562 citationsJosée Bloemer, Ko de Ruyter et al.profile →
More than Words: The Influence of Affective Content and Linguistic Style Matches in Online Reviews on Conversion Rates
2012547 citationsStephan Ludwig, Ko de Ruyter et al.Journal of Marketingprofile →
Augmenting the eye of the beholder: exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to enhance online service experiences
2017413 citationsTim Hilken, Ko de Ruyter et al.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Scienceprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Ko de Ruyter'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 Ko de Ruyter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ko de Ruyter more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ko de Ruyter. 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 Ko de Ruyter. The network helps show where Ko de Ruyter may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ko de Ruyter
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ko de Ruyter.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ko de Ruyter 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 Ko de Ruyter. Ko de Ruyter is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Northey, Gavin, et al.. (2016). Topology of Augmented Commerce: The State and Directions for Future Research. Research Publications (Maastricht University).2 indexed citations
12.
Blažević, Vera, Caroline Wiertz, June Cotte, Ko de Ruyter, & Debbie Keeling. (2016). GOSIP in Cyberspace: Conceptualization and Scale Development for General Online Social Interaction Propensity. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
Laer, Tom van, Ko de Ruyter, & Martin Wetzels. (2012). Effects of Narrative Transportation on Persuasion: a Meta-Analysis. City Research Online (City University London).1 indexed citations
15.
Ludwig, Stephan, Ko de Ruyter, Mike Friedman, et al.. (2012). More than Words: The Influence of Affective Content and Linguistic Style Matches in Online Reviews on Conversion Rates. Journal of Marketing. 77(1). 87–103.547 indexed citations breakdown →
16.
Laer, Tom van & Ko de Ruyter. (2010). In Stories We Trust: How Narrative Apologies Provide Cover for Competitive Vulnerability After Integrity-Violating Blog Posts. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
17.
Ruyter, Ko de, et al.. (2005). Cases in call center management. RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library).1 indexed citations
Ruyter, Ko de, et al.. (1998). On the relationship between financial institutions image, quality, satisfaction and loyalty. Document Server@UHasselt (UHasselt).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.