Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.
Impact in
- Authors
- John Turner
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w19765011 →Countries where authors are citing Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.
This map shows the geographic impact of Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.. 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 Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.
This network shows the impact of Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior..
About Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior.
This paper, published in 2010, received 792 indexed citations . Written by John Turner. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (430 citations), Social Psychology (201 citations), Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (174 citations), Gender Studies (162 citations) and Communication (122 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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w19765011.