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.
Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering
2018437 citationsVahid Garousi, Michael Felderer et al.Information and Software Technologyprofile →
Author Peers
Peers are selected by citation overlap in the author's most active subfields.
citations ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Michael Felderer
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Michael Felderer'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 Michael Felderer with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Michael Felderer more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Michael Felderer
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Michael Felderer. 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 Michael Felderer. The network helps show where Michael Felderer may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Michael Felderer
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Michael Felderer.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Michael Felderer 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 Michael Felderer. Michael Felderer is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Felderer, Michael, et al.. (2020). Evaluating the Usefulness and Ease of Use of an Experimentation Definition Language.. Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. 158–163.1 indexed citations
Molléri, Jefferson Seide, Michael Felderer, Emília Mendes, & Kai Petersen. (2019). Reasoning about Research Quality Alignment in Software Engineering. Journal of Systems and Software.1 indexed citations
11.
Felderer, Michael & Marco Kuhrmann. (2019). Using Mini-Projects to Teach Empirical Software Engineering.. 75–86.2 indexed citations
Garousi, Vahid, et al.. (2018). What we know about software testability: a survey.. arXiv (Cornell University).2 indexed citations
14.
Garousi, Vahid, et al.. (2018). NLP-assisted software testing: a systematic review. arXiv (Cornell University).2 indexed citations
15.
Bjarnason, Elizabeth, Markus Borg, Marian Daun, et al.. (2016). Joint Proceedings of the REFSQ 2016 Co-Located Events : Joint Proceedings of REFSQ-2016 Workshops, Doctoral Symposium, Research Method Track, and Poster Track co-located with the 22nd International Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 2016). publication.editionName.1 indexed citations
16.
Forbrig, Peter, Mārīte Kirikova, Cristina Palomares, et al.. (2016). Joint Proceedings of the REFSQ 2016 Co-Located Events. Research Explorer (The University of Manchester).1 indexed citations
17.
Felderer, Michael, et al.. (2015). Mutual knowledge transfer between industry and academia to improve testing with defect taxonomies.. 238–242.2 indexed citations
Breu, Ruth, et al.. (2011). Living Models - Ten Principles for Change-Driven Software Engineering.. 5. 267–290.19 indexed citations
20.
Felderer, Michael, et al.. (2010). Security Testing by Telling TestStories.. 195–202.11 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.