Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies

1000 indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2017, received 1000 indexed citations. Written by Robert J. Johnston, Kevin Boyle, Wiktor Adamowicz, Jeff Bennett, Roy Brouwer, Trudy Ann Cameron, W. Michael Hanemann, Nick Hanley, Mandy Ryan and Riccardo Scarpa covering the research area of General Decision Sciences and Economics and Econometrics. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Economics and Econometrics (856 citations), Global and Planetary Change (272 citations) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (263 citations). Published in Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/10.1086/691697 →

Countries where authors are citing Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies. 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 Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies.

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.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1086/691697.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026