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.
Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes
2002835 citationsFrance Bélanger, Janine S. Hiller et al.The Journal of Strategic Information Systemsprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Wanda J. Smith
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Wanda J. Smith'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 Wanda J. Smith with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Wanda J. Smith more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Wanda J. Smith. 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 Wanda J. Smith. The network helps show where Wanda J. Smith may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Wanda J. Smith
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Wanda J. Smith.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Wanda J. Smith 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 Wanda J. Smith. Wanda J. Smith 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.
Lewis, Tracy L. & Wanda J. Smith. (2008). Creating high performing software engineering teams: the impact of problem solving style dominance on group conflict and performance. Journal of computing sciences in colleges. 24(2). 121–129.12 indexed citations
Harrington, K. Vernard, Tracy L. Lewis, & Wanda J. Smith. (2007). A Qualitative Analysis of Computing Students' Professional Identity and its Relationship to Strategies for Coping with Stressors in the Computing Disciplines. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 492.5 indexed citations
Kasper, George M., K. Vernard Harrington, Lemuria Carter, & Wanda J. Smith. (2005). Coping Strategies and Emotional Intelligence: New Perspectives on Computing Students. Americas Conference on Information Systems. 249.1 indexed citations
6.
Lewis, Tracy L. & Wanda J. Smith. (2005). The computer science debate. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 37(2). 80–84.9 indexed citations
7.
Dove, Martin T., Wanda J. Smith, W. Emmerich, et al.. (2005). The e-Minerals Project: developing the concept of the Virtual Organisation to support collaborative work on molecular-scale environmental simulations. Department of Earth Sciences EPrints Repository. 1058–1065.7 indexed citations
Bélanger, France, Janine S. Hiller, & Wanda J. Smith. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems. 11(3-4). 245–270.835 indexed citations breakdown →
Smith, Wanda J.. (1981). Sociopolitical Impact on Human Factors. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting. 25(1). 369–373.3 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.