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.
Countries citing papers authored by Ruut Veenhoven
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Ruut Veenhoven'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 Ruut Veenhoven with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ruut Veenhoven more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ruut Veenhoven. 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 Ruut Veenhoven. The network helps show where Ruut Veenhoven may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ruut Veenhoven
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ruut Veenhoven.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ruut Veenhoven 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 Ruut Veenhoven. Ruut Veenhoven is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Buettner, Dan, Toben F. Nelson, & Ruut Veenhoven. (2020). Ways to Greater Happiness: A Delphi Study. Journal of Happiness Studies. 21(8). 2789–2806.18 indexed citations
5.
Burger, Martijn, et al.. (2018). Happiness in Rotterdam: Analysis of 7 city surveys. International Advances in Economic Research. 6(2). 82–100.1 indexed citations
6.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2012). Evidence-based pursuit of happiness: What we should know, what we do know and what we can get to know. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).4 indexed citations
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2012). Sturen op geluk: is dat mogelijk en wenselijk?. RePub (Erasmus University, Rotterdam).1 indexed citations
9.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2012). Lebenszufriedenheit im internationalen Vergleich. RePub (Erasmus University, Rotterdam). 9. 298–302.
10.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2009). Comparability of happiness across nations. Journal of Happiness Studies. 211–234.14 indexed citations
11.
Veenhoven, Ruut, et al.. (2007). Quality of life & happiness of people : in Japan and the Netherlands.3 indexed citations
12.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2004). Equality of happiness in 90 nations 1990-2000: How much citizens differ in enjoyment of their life-as-a-whole. RePub (Erasmus University, Rotterdam).1 indexed citations
13.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (2004). Sustainable Consumption and Happiness. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).9 indexed citations
Veenhoven, Ruut. (1998). Vergelijken van geluk in landen. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS). 41. 58–64.9 indexed citations
19.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (1989). Did the crisis really hurt? Effects of the 1980-82 economic recession on satisfaction, mental health and mortality. RePub (Erasmus University, Rotterdam).17 indexed citations
20.
Veenhoven, Ruut. (1987). Quality of life in West-Germany. Social Indicators Research.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.