Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition)
Impact in
- Accounting 123
- Authors
- Uma Sekaran
- Journal
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w8565733 →Countries where authors are citing Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition)
This map shows the geographic impact of Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition). 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 Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition) with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition) more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition)
This network shows the impact of Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition). Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition).
About Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition)
This paper, published in 2009, received 510 indexed citations . Written by Uma Sekaran. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Accounting (123 citations), Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (115 citations), Sociology and Political Science (103 citations), Strategy and Management (101 citations) and Marketing (93 citations). Published in Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).
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/w8565733.