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.
Content-Analysis Research: An Examination of Applications with Directives for Improving Research Reliability and Objectivity
19911.1k citationsRichard H. Kolbe, Melissa S. BurnettJournal of Consumer Researchprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Melissa S. Burnett
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Melissa S. Burnett'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 Melissa S. Burnett with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Melissa S. Burnett more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Melissa S. Burnett
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Melissa S. Burnett. 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 Melissa S. Burnett. The network helps show where Melissa S. Burnett may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Melissa S. Burnett
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Melissa S. Burnett.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Melissa S. Burnett 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 Melissa S. Burnett. Melissa S. Burnett is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
14 of 14 papers shown
1.
Burnett, Melissa S. & Charles E. Pettijohn. (2015). Investigating the Efficacy of Mind-Body Therapies and Emotional Intelligence on Worker Stress in an Organizational Setting: An Experimental Approach. Journal of organizational culture, communication and conflict. 19(1). 146.10 indexed citations
2.
Pettijohn, Charles E., Allen D. Schaefer, & Melissa S. Burnett. (2014). Salesperson Performance: Exploring the Roles of Role Ambiguity, Autonomy and Self-Efficacy. Academy of Marketing Studies journal. 18(1). 99.10 indexed citations
Pettijohn, Charles E., et al.. (2008). Ethics in Advertising: Differences in Industry Values and Student Perceptions. Academy of Marketing Studies journal. 12(2). 81.8 indexed citations
Kolbe, Richard H. & Melissa S. Burnett. (1991). Content-Analysis Research: An Examination of Applications with Directives for Improving Research Reliability and Objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research. 18(2). 243–243.1125 indexed citations breakdown →
12.
Pettijohn, Charles E., Linda S. Pettijohn, R. Stephen Parker, & Melissa S. Burnett. (1990). An Experimental Analysis of the Effectiveness of Student Role-Playing in Sales Training. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning: Proceedings of the Annual ABSEL conference. 17.
13.
Burnett, Melissa S.. (1988). Guilt as an individual difference variable : scale development and predictive validity assessment. SHAREOK (University of Oklahoma).2 indexed citations
14.
Gentry, James W., Joshua L. Wiener, & Melissa S. Burnett. (1987). The Story, the Frame, and the Choice. ACR North American Advances.2 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.