Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research

848 indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2001, received 848 indexed citations. Written by David Collier and Robert Adcock covering the research area of Sociology and Political Science and Political Science and International Relations. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (442 citations), Political Science and International Relations (412 citations) and Strategy and Management (117 citations). Published in eScholarship (California Digital Library).

In The Last Decade

doi.org/w2467866 →

Countries where authors are citing Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative 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 Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research.

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/w2467866.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026