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.
Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication
2005773 citationsPamela Hinds, Mark MortensenOrganization Scienceprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Mark Mortensen
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Mark Mortensen'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 Mark Mortensen with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mark Mortensen more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark Mortensen. 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 Mark Mortensen. The network helps show where Mark Mortensen may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mark Mortensen
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mark Mortensen.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mark Mortensen 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 Mark Mortensen. Mark Mortensen is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Bertolotti, Fabiola, et al.. (2013). How Many Teams should we Manage at Once? The Effect of Multiple Team Membership, Collaborative Technologies, and Polychronicity on Team Performance. IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia). 2. 1939–1949.1 indexed citations
O’Leary, Michael Boyer, Mark Mortensen, & Anita Williams Woolley. (2009). Multiple Team Membership: A Theoretical Model of Its Effects on Productivity and Learning for Individuals, Teams, and Organizations. DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).3 indexed citations
15.
Mortensen, Mark. (2008). Fuzzy Teams: Why do teams disagree on their membership, and what does it mean?. DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).5 indexed citations
16.
Mortensen, Mark, et al.. (2003). Digital Video: An Old Medium Learns Some New Tricks. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2003(1). 1503–1509.1 indexed citations
17.
Hinds, Pamela & Mark Mortensen. (2002). Understanding Antecedents to Conflict in Geographically Distributed Research and Development Teams.. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 38.6 indexed citations
18.
Tyler‐Wood, Tandra, et al.. (2001). The Use of Two-Way Audio Video at the University of North Texas As a Tool for Practicum Supervision. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2001(1). 2768–2770.3 indexed citations
19.
Mortensen, Mark, et al.. (2001). Modeling and Implementing Effective Technology Practices. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2001(1). 2679–2684.
20.
Mills, Juline E., et al.. (2000). You've Got Trouble!. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 41(5). 64–71.11 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.