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.
This map shows the geographic impact of Mark Rogers'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 Rogers with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mark Rogers more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark Rogers. 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 Rogers. The network helps show where Mark Rogers may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mark Rogers
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mark Rogers.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mark Rogers 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 Rogers. Mark Rogers 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.
Hall, Bronwyn H., Christian Helmers, & Mark Rogers. (2014). The choice between formal and informal intellectual property: A review. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics.1 indexed citations
2.
Hall, Bronwyn H., Christian Helmers, Mark Rogers, & Vania Sena. (2012). The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Literature Review. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics.1 indexed citations
3.
Greenhalgh, Christine, et al.. (2011). Trade Mark Incentives - Report for the UK Intellectual Property Office. MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society).8 indexed citations
4.
Greenhalgh, Christine, et al.. (2011). Trade Mark Incentives. SSRN Electronic Journal.15 indexed citations
Greenhalgh, Christine, et al.. (2010). Intellectual property enforcement in smaller UK firms:a report for the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property Policy (SABIP). Aston Publications Explorer (Aston University).4 indexed citations
Rogers, Mark, Christine Greenhalgh, & Christian Helmers. (2007). The association between the use of IP by UK SMEs in 2001 and subsequent performance in 2002 to 2004. Aston Publications Explorer (Aston University).6 indexed citations
10.
Greenhalgh, Christine & Mark Rogers. (2006). Market Valuation of UK Intellectual Property: Manufacturing, Utility and Financial Services Firms. Chapters.2 indexed citations
11.
Rogers, Mark. (2006). Estimating the impact of R&D on productivity using the BERD-ARD data. Aston Publications Explorer (Aston University).7 indexed citations
12.
Greenhalgh, Christine & Mark Rogers. (2006). The Value of Innovation: The Interaction of Competition, R&D and Ip. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics.11 indexed citations
13.
Rogers, Mark, et al.. (2005). The economics of copyright. World Economy. 6(3). 153–174.16 indexed citations
14.
Rogers, Mark. (2002). The Influence of Diversification and Market Structure on the R&D Intensity of Large Australian Firms. SSRN Electronic Journal.3 indexed citations
Rogers, Mark. (1998). Management, Organisational and Technological Change in Australian Workplaces: Evidence from the AWIRS Data Sets.3 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.