Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.

11.5k indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1998, received 11.5k indexed citations. Written by John W. Creswell covering the research area of . It is primarily cited by scholars working on Education (3.7k citations), Sociology and Political Science (3.0k citations) and General Health Professions (1.6k citations). Published in The International Islamic University Malaysia Repository (The International Islamic University Malaysia).

In The Last Decade

doi.org/w35061294 →

Countries where authors are citing Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.. 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 Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions..

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/w35061294.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026