Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q1
WOS
Q1
Impact factor
9.5
SJR
7.194
CiteScore
30.0
Categories
Business and International Management
Economics and Econometrics
Marketing
Areas
Business, Management and Accounting
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Years of issue
1973-2025
journal names
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
J ACAD MARKET SCI
Top-3 citing journals

Journal of Business Research
(9507 citations)

Industrial Marketing Management
(6001 citations)

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
(5590 citations)
Top-3 organizations

Texas A&M University
(76 publications)

University of Miami
(68 publications)

Arizona State University
(64 publications)

University of Washington
(13 publications)

Florida State University
(11 publications)

University of South Florida
(11 publications)
Top-3 countries
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 1369
Q1

Cosimulation-based biomechanics of the human body with hip prosthesis
Di Bona R., Catelani D., Ottaviano E., Gentile D., Testa G.
Q1
Multibody System Dynamics
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0

Q1

Correction to: A new skeletal model for the ankle joint complex
Rodrigues da Silva M., Marques F., Tavares da Silva M., Flores P.
Q1
Multibody System Dynamics
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0

Q1

A symplectic finite element method in time for periodic response of multibody systems
Wang H., Wang C., Wang G., Pan Y., Mikkola A., Peng H.
Q1
Multibody System Dynamics
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0

Q1

Investigation of the dynamic transmission accuracy of an industrial robot joint RV reducer under variable situations
Xu L., Wu Y.
The dynamic transmission error of the joint RV (rotating vector) reducer is one of the important factors affecting the positioning accuracy of industrial robots. However, the current studies on the transmission accuracy characteristics of RV reducers are based on the equal speed driving condition, which neglects the impact of the transmission error generated by the joint RV reducer on the positioning accuracy when the robot is in the start-stop variable speed phase. This study carries out an in-depth analysis of the dynamic transmission accuracy characteristics of joint RV reducers of industrial robots under variable-speed working conditions. Two typical mathematical models of variable-speed drive laws are constructed, and a multibody dynamic model of the RV reducer that takes into account the geometric errors of typical components is established, aiming to more accurately simulate the operating state of the RV reducer under actual working conditions. To confirm the accuracy of the theoretical RV reducer contact dynamics model, the dynamic transmission error test of the RV reducer under equal-speed conditions is carried out. The results show that the dynamic model can better reflect the actual transmission characteristics of the RV reducer. Thereafter, based on the theoretical model, the effects of different driving laws on the dynamic transmission error of joint RV reducers are analyzed in depth. The results of the study show that the transmission error of the RV reducer under variable speed drive is significantly larger than that under equal speed drive. Moreover, angular acceleration and load inertia are the main factors affecting the transmission error of RV reducers for industrial robot joints.
Q1

Muscle path predictions using a discrete geodesic Euler–Lagrange model in constrained optimisation: comparison with OpenSim and experimental data
Lavaill M., Chen X., Heinrich S., Pivonka P., Leyendecker S.
Abstract
Accurate and robust modelling of muscle paths is crucial for predicting human movement. Traditional methods often rely on simplified straight-line representations and manual specifications of via-points and wrapping surfaces, which may lead to inconsistent and unrealistic muscle paths The discrete geodesic Euler–Lagrange (DGEL) method identifies geodesics with minimal curvature trajectories that adhere closely to anatomical constraints. Embedding DGEL into an optimisation problem with a specific objective function has the potential to identify muscle paths with smooth changes in muscle length over the course of the motion, thereby avoiding abrupt muscle discontinuities. This study aims to investigate the performance of the DGEL method. We developed multibody models with increasing complexity (i.e. a static arm model, a kinematic elbow model and a kinematic shoulder model) and investigated different scenarios, such as muscle attachment modifications, simulation of diverse motions and extreme ranges of motion. We performed a comparative analysis between the geodesic model and the open-source OpenSim framework, with validation against experimental data to assess physiological plausibility. Our findings reveal that the DGEL method overcomes limitations inherent in traditional approaches, including discontinuities and incorrect wrapping surface interactions. For the static arm model, the DGEL-computed muscle length showed a closer match to ground truth compared to OpenSim. In the elbow model, the DGEL method eliminated unphysiological muscle path discontinuities. In the shoulder model, the DGEL method was validated across three different motions against experimental muscle moment arms, achieving great accuracy and superior robustness in handling complex muscle paths. This method effectively addressed common pitfalls in muscle path modelling, such as bone penetrations and erratic trajectories. Future work will further validate the DGEL method across diverse real-world applications and optimise its performance through advanced objective functions. The DGEL approach represents a significant improvement in the accuracy and robustness of muscle path modelling, advancing the field of biomechanics and musculoskeletal modelling.
Q1

Dynamic responses of a vibro-impact capsule robot self-propelling in the large intestine via multibody dynamics
Wang Z., Tian J., Liu Y., Neves A., Prasad S.
Abstract
In recent years, colonic capsule endoscopy has become available in clinical practice as an alternative modality to colonoscopy. However, it faces challenges such as prolonged examination time and the absence of clinician navigation. Leveraging their pioneering work in the field of vibro-impact self-propulsion technique for gastrointestinal endoscopy, Zhang et al. (IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 8:1842–1849, 2023) developed a novel, untethered, self-propelled, endoscopic capsule robot, with the aim of providing a new means of examining bowel cancer in real time. To evaluate and optimize the passage of this capsule robot self-propelling in the large intestine, this work adopts multibody dynamics analysis and experimental investigation to study the robot’s dynamics and its interaction with the intestinal environment. Considering the complex anatomy of the large intestine, containing different sections, e.g., cecum, ascending, transverse, descending, and sigmoid colon, and variations of the haustra, e.g., with various radii, lengths, and heights, the robot was driven by the square-wave excitation of an inner mass interacting with the capsule body and tested on a real porcine colon. The robot’s driving parameters, including the excitation frequency, amplitude, and duty cycle, and the dimensions of the haustra are the two main factors influencing the robot’s progression in the intestine. By comparing with the experimental results, the proposed multibody dynamics model developed using MSC Adams can estimate the movement of the capsule robot and the intestinal resistance quantitatively. Extensive numerical and experimental studies suggest an excitation frequency of 60 Hz and a duty cycle of 0.4 as the optimal parameters for driving the robot, and the longer the haustral length is, the faster the robot passes through. These results ensure the validity of the proposed multibody dynamics platform, which can be used by robotic engineers for developing medical robots for intestinal examinations.
Q1

Fluid-conveying pipes in the floating frame of reference formulation
van Voorthuizen K., Abdul Rasheed M.I., Schilder J.
Abstract
This work presents a new formulation for flexible fluid-conveying pipe elements based on the widely used floating frame of reference formulation. The elements can be used as a tool for the analysis of flexible multibody systems that contain fluid-conveying pipes, as it is well known that the movement of the fluid can influence the behavior and stability of such systems. The pipe defines a control volume through which the fluid, which is considered to be a moving mass, axially flows. The velocity of a material point of the fluid is therefore a material derivative of its position, representing the large rigid movement and small elastic deformation of the pipe along with the velocity of the fluid with respect to the pipe. The equations of motion are derived through the principle of virtual work, spatial discretization by finite element interpolation functions, and model reduction. A simplification of the consistent equations of motion is proposed, which avoids the use of inertia shape integrals and reduces the effort required to implement the developed fluid-conveying pipe elements in existing multibody software. The developed elements are validated by simulation of a straight cantilevered pipe and a curved pipe constrained on one end by a hinge. A simulation of a concrete printing system illustrates the straightforward incorporation of the elements in larger multibody systems.
Q1

Dynamic modeling and simulation of the multi-point collision and contact problem of multi-legged robots
Ma X., Zhao S., An Y., Li K., Wang T.
The problem of multi-point collision and contact in multi-legged robots involves complex dynamics with multiple closed loops, variable topology, and numerous contact points, making simulations challenging. Additionally, Zeno behavior—characterized by an infinite number of discrete transitions within a finite time—is likely to occur, reducing computational efficiency and potentially causing simulations to stall. This paper establishes a linear complementary dynamic model to study the collision and contact problem of multi-legged mobile robots. For the uncertainty of multi-point collision and contact, we use sets and transformation matrices to represent the number and position changes of the points that collide or contact with the ground. This paper separately studies the problems of multi-point collision and multi-point continuous contact and considers the coupling effect of collision and continuous contact. A new criterion to determine the state of continuous contact is proposed, and modifications are made to the relevant linear complementary equations to prevent the Zeno behavior. Finally, several numerical examples are provided to verify the effectiveness of the method.
Q1

Vibration isolation performance and non-probabilistic reliability evaluation of multidimensional vibration isolator with interval joint clearance
Gao X., Niu J., He L., Wang Z., Qin Z., Wu H.
For suppressing multidimensional vibration effectively, the multidimensional vibration isolator based on parallel mechanism considering interval joint clearance is proposed. The kinematics and dynamics of the isolator are established respectively. The contact force generated due to interval joint clearance is modeled respectively by the Lankarani–Nikravesh (L-N) model and the modified Coulomb friction force model. Furthermore, the dynamics of the isolator with interval joint clearance are obtained by the first order interval perturbation method. The upper and lower bounds of vibration isolation performance are calculated, which indicates the isolator with interval joint clearance inhibited external vibration in time and frequency domain respectively. The vibration isolation performance is most sensitive in pitch (around $x$ ) direction due to the existence of interval joint clearance. The non-probabilistic reliability model of the isolator is proposed by the shortest distance method, and the non-probabilistic reliability index is investigated in each isolation direction with interval joint clearance. The reliability index of the isolator exhibits a quasi-stable area in horizontal (in $x$ ) and pitch (around $x$ ) directions, which implies the reliability index is not sensitive to joint clearance variation in a certain perturbation range. The proposed vibration isolator with interval joint clearance is fabricated, and the vibration isolation experiment is conducted. The experimental results are generally consistent with the theoretical results, which indicates the correctness of the analysis.
Q1

Using high fidelity discrete element simulation to calibrate an expeditious terramechanics model in a multibody dynamics framework
Zhang Y., Dai J., Hu W., Negrut D.
The wheel–soil interaction has great impact on the dynamics of off-road vehicles in terramechanics applications. The soil contact model (SCM), which anchors an empirical method to characterize the frictional contact between a wheel and soil, has been widely used in off-road vehicle dynamics simulations because it quickly produces adequate results for many terramechanics applications. The SCM approach calls for a set of model parameters that are obtained via a bevameter test. This test is expensive and time consuming to carry out, and in some cases difficult to set up, e.g., in extraterrestrial applications. We propose an approach to address these concerns by conducting the bevameter test in simulation, using a model that captures the physics of the actual experiment with high fidelity. To that end, we model the bevameter test rig as a multibody system, while the dynamics of the soil is captured using a discrete element model (DEM). The multibody dynamics–soil dynamics co-simulation is used to replicate the bevameter test, producing high fidelity ground truth test data that is subsequently used to calibrate the SCM parameters within a Bayesian inference framework. To test the accuracy of the resulting SCM terramechanics, we run single wheel and full rover simulations using both DEM and SCM terrains. The SCM results match well with those produced by the DEM solution, and the simulation time for SCM is two to three orders of magnitude lower than that of DEM. All simulations in this work are performed using Chrono, an open-source, publicly available simulator. The scripts and models used are available in a public repository for reproducibility studies and further research.
Q1

A machine learning approach to simulate flexible body dynamics
Slimak T., Zwölfer A., Todorov B., Rixen D.
Abstract
Flexible body dynamics simulations are powerful tools to realistically analyze vehicles, machines, mechanics, etc. However, the inherently nonlinear governing equations often require tailor-made and computationally expense solution strategies. Employing artificial neural networks for forward dynamics analyses of flexible bodies may be not only useful as a model reduction tool, since evaluating a network is frequently faster compared to solving physics-based models, but also to enhance models with experimental data. In this realm four primary strategies have emerged: (i) Incorporating time as an input to the artificial neural network to predict the desired solution variables at that specific time. (ii) Utilizing an entire time series as input, the network generates the corresponding time series of the desired solution variables in a single pass through the artificial neural network. (iii) Employing an artificial neural network to advance one time step into the future using the states as input. (iv) Leveraging the artificial neural network solely for learning the equations of motion or energetic quantities, e.g., Lagrangian/Hamiltonian, coupled with standard techniques from analytical dynamics and time integration. Approaches (iii) and (iv) can be considered advantageous owing to their inherent physics-informed nature, greater flexibility in adopting varying time steps, and ease of integration with classical simulation techniques. This contribution, therefore, presents a method to predict flexible body dynamics one step at a time using two complimentary artificial neural networks. One network predicts the equations of motion relationship between positions, velocities, and accelerations, while a second network or numerical integrator propagates the system states forwards in time. This work demonstrates the feasibility of the developed approach on the testcase of a flexible beam. Various parameter studies and alternative solutions are presented to highlight the performance of the developed approach. The robustness and ability to extrapolate are also explored to determine the practical viability of this solution. The intention of this single-body work is to enable the future embedding in a multibody context.
Q1

Embedding reference dynamics in model predictive control for trajectory tracking of multi-input multi-output non-minimum phase underactuated multibody systems
Bettega J., Richiedei D., Tamellin I.
This paper proposes a feedback control technique for path and trajectory tracking on multi-input, multi-output nonminimum phase underactuated multibody systems and applies it to a spatial gantry crane moving a double pendulum. The two links forming the double pendulum are connected in series and the desired output of the system is the tip of the second link. This output selection yields to a nonminimum phase system, which is a class of dynamical systems that are particularly challenging from the control design perspective. In this paper, an enhanced formulation of Model Predictive Control is proposed to solve the output trajectory tracking problem by embedding the dynamics of the spatial reference trajectory within the optimization process performed at each time step. The proposed control technique is formulated considering two different scenarios: the case of torque-controlled (i.e., current-controlled) actuators, and the case of position-controlled actuators. The latter is unusual in the field of MPC and is suitable for industrial applications where proprietary controllers are adopted. Numerical validations show negligible contour and tracking errors during the execution of the desired trajectories, with low computational effort.
Q1

Optimising a driving mechanism mechanical design of EXOTIC exoskeleton—a review on upper limb exoskeletons driving systems and a case study
Falkowski P., Mohammadi M., Andreasen Struijk L.N., Rzymkowski C., Pilat Z.
AbstractWhile designing rehabilitation exoskeletons is often realised based on experience and intuition, many processes can be computer-aided. This gives the opportunity to design lighter and more compact constructions. Hence, the devices can be fully wearable and have a wider range of motion. So far, mainly topology optimisation and parametric dimensional optimisations have been used for that. The presented study addresses the problem of automatic selection of the driving systems for exoskeletons. It consists of the literature review of the components used to actuate the joints of such constructions, optimisation algorithm development, and a case study on the EXOTIC exoskeleton. The method includes building a database of motors and gearboxes, computing inverse kinematics of a system to obtain angular trajectories from the task-oriented paths, iteration computing inverse dynamics to compute required torque and the search for the optimal solution according to the defined goal function. This approach enables single joint and multijoint optimisation, with the custom goal function minimising optionally masses, diameters or widths of the selected driving systems. The investigation consists of the 28 simulation trials for EXOTIC exoskeleton to compare results obtained for different aims. Moreover, to visualise the effect, the 1st DOF driving mechanism is redesigned to obtain its minimum width based on the optimisation results. The optimal choice reduced the actuation mechanism mass by 15.3%, while its total dimensions by 17.5%, 8.5% and 26.2%, respectively. The presented approach is easily transferable to any other active exoskeleton and can contribute to designing compact and lightweight constructions. This is particularly important in assistive rehabilitation and can also be used in industrial assistance processes.
Q1

Tailored gait-pattern generation and verification based on the dynamic analysis of the human musculoskeletal model
Shanmuga Prasad S., Kim Y.
This study presents a novel Forward Dynamic approach that integrates a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to generate and optimize gait patterns with Inverse Dynamics analysis, tailored to individual users in the robot-assisted training platform. The resulting trajectories provide gait-trajectory planning using the developed gait-pattern simulator, enabling medical personnel to select customized tasks and training trajectories for users based on their training goals, subsequently transferring user-specific parameters to the exoskeletal robot for rehabilitation/training. By leveraging biomechanical data as reference (joint torque and force) from the Inverse Dynamic analysis, the method foregoes the necessity for experimental data, directly predicting joint angles and positions. To ensure the validity of the proposed method, we used a combined approach of numerical analysis and comparison with motion-capture data. This evaluation aimed to assess how closely the simulated results resembled real human walking motion for the lower-extremity joints.
Q1

Multi-physics tribo-dynamics simulation of lubricated translational joints in marine engines
Li R., Li G., Meng X., Sun R., Cheng W.
Lubricated translational joints are extensively utilized in power equipment. Due to the presence of clearance, the moving mass exhibits transverse motion within the guide rail in addition to its reciprocating motion. This transverse motion significantly influences the friction, wear, and service life of the friction pair. In this process, multi-physics factors such as fluid lubrication, structural deformation, and frictional heat generation interact with each other, making the tribo-dynamics characteristics very complex. In the current study, a new thermal-fluid-solid coupled method for modeling the tribo-dynamics of translational lubricated joints is presented, and it is applied to the crosshead slider-guide friction pair in marine engines. Research results show that the tribo-dynamics characteristics of the slider predicted by the model is consistent with the experimental ones, the correctness of the model is verified. The frictional heat generation has little effect on the tribo-dynamics characteristics of the crosshead slider under the rated operating conditions. However, the structure deformation induced by the external load intensifies the transverse motion of the crosshead slider. Compared with the model that ignored the deformation, the transverse displacement can be increased by 30%, which indicates that it is necessary to consider the multi-physics coupling effect.
Top-100
Citing journals
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
|
|
Journal of Business Research
9507 citations, 3.81%
|
|
Industrial Marketing Management
6001 citations, 2.41%
|
|
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
5590 citations, 2.24%
|
|
Sustainability
4763 citations, 1.91%
|
|
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
4361 citations, 1.75%
|
|
European Journal of Marketing
4216 citations, 1.69%
|
|
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing
2960 citations, 1.19%
|
|
Journal of Services Marketing
2865 citations, 1.15%
|
|
SSRN Electronic Journal
2543 citations, 1.02%
|
|
Psychology and Marketing
2303 citations, 0.92%
|
|
Journal of Service Research
1843 citations, 0.74%
|
|
International Journal of Hospitality Management
1691 citations, 0.68%
|
|
Journal of Business Ethics
1545 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Journal of Product and Brand Management
1542 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Journal of Marketing
1503 citations, 0.6%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychology
1495 citations, 0.6%
|
|
International Journal of Bank Marketing
1395 citations, 0.56%
|
|
Service Industries Journal
1365 citations, 0.55%
|
|
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics
1342 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Journal of Service Management
1320 citations, 0.53%
|
|
Marketing Intelligence and Planning
1205 citations, 0.48%
|
|
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management
1182 citations, 0.47%
|
|
International Marketing Review
1144 citations, 0.46%
|
|
Journal of Marketing Management
968 citations, 0.39%
|
|
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
936 citations, 0.38%
|
|
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management
925 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice
921 citations, 0.37%
|
|
International Journal of Research in Marketing
913 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Journal of Retailing
912 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management
900 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Computers in Human Behavior
851 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Advances in Marketing, Customer Relationship Management, and E-Services
845 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Journal of Strategic Marketing
829 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Journal of Consumer Marketing
821 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Journal of Service Theory and Practice
800 citations, 0.32%
|
|
Journal of Consumer Behaviour
784 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Journal of Cleaner Production
747 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Journal of Product Innovation Management
707 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Cogent Business and Management
659 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Tourism Management
658 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Journal of International Marketing
651 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing
621 citations, 0.25%
|
|
International Journal of Consumer Studies
597 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Journal of Brand Management
592 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Optimistic Marketing in Challenging Times: Serving Ever-Shifting Customer Needs
576 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Managing Service Quality
554 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Internet Research
506 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Journal of Interactive Marketing
489 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Management Decision
478 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Journal of Relationship Marketing
478 citations, 0.19%
|
|
British Food Journal
476 citations, 0.19%
|
|
AMS Review
474 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Marketing Theory
463 citations, 0.19%
|
|
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
453 citations, 0.18%
|
|
International Business Review
440 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Industrial Management and Data Systems
370 citations, 0.15%
|
|
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research
366 citations, 0.15%
|
|
SAGE Open
360 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Australasian Marketing Journal
355 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Heliyon
350 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Islamic Marketing
334 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing
327 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing
321 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Business Strategy and the Environment
314 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Advertising
308 citations, 0.12%
|
|
PLoS ONE
306 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Travel Research
301 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Marketing Research
299 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Information and Management
298 citations, 0.12%
|
|
International Journal of Service Industry Management
296 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Macromarketing
289 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of International Consumer Marketing
283 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Recherche et Applications en Marketing (French Edition)
281 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
272 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management
272 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Production Economics
272 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Information Management
269 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management
266 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Services Marketing Quarterly
260 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Qualitative Market Research
259 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence
244 citations, 0.1%
|
|
International Journal of Advertising
243 citations, 0.1%
|
|
European Business Review
238 citations, 0.1%
|
|
International Journal of Innovation Management
236 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Current Issues in Tourism
235 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
230 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Promotion Management
227 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Information Technology and People
222 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Marketing Communications
220 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management
220 citations, 0.09%
|
|
International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship
218 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Service Business
216 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management
216 citations, 0.09%
|
|
International Journal of Operations and Production Management
212 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Social Responsibility Journal
208 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Current Psychology
207 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Marketing Letters
207 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications
200 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Journal of Knowledge Management
197 citations, 0.08%
|
|
European Journal of Innovation Management
196 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
|
Citing publishers
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
|
|
Emerald
54002 citations, 21.67%
|
|
Elsevier
49139 citations, 19.72%
|
|
Taylor & Francis
32877 citations, 13.19%
|
|
Springer Nature
30075 citations, 12.07%
|
|
Wiley
15586 citations, 6.25%
|
|
SAGE
13928 citations, 5.59%
|
|
MDPI
8765 citations, 3.52%
|
|
IGI Global
6775 citations, 2.72%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
4340 citations, 1.74%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
2663 citations, 1.07%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
2406 citations, 0.97%
|
|
American Marketing Association
1400 citations, 0.56%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
929 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
922 citations, 0.37%
|
|
World Scientific
824 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
784 citations, 0.31%
|
|
CAIRN
654 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
637 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Oxford University Press
579 citations, 0.23%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
545 citations, 0.22%
|
|
SciELO
369 citations, 0.15%
|
|
LLC CPC Business Perspectives
351 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Cognizant, LLC
308 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
297 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
288 citations, 0.12%
|
|
N T C Publications Ltd.
280 citations, 0.11%
|
|
JMIR Publications
256 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Human Kinetics
241 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Japan Marketing Academy
227 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Academy of Management
208 citations, 0.08%
|
|
IOP Publishing
204 citations, 0.08%
|
|
EDP Sciences
198 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
183 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Korea Distribution Science Association (KODISA)
182 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Fundacao Getulio Vargas, Escola de Administracao de Empresas de Sao Paulo
161 citations, 0.06%
|
|
AOSIS
156 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Japan Society of Marketing and Distribution
150 citations, 0.06%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
135 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Center for Strategic Studies in Business and Finance SSBFNET
133 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
112 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Science Alert
112 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
109 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
100 citations, 0.04%
|
|
The Advertising Research Foundation
99 citations, 0.04%
|
|
IOS Press
95 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles
90 citations, 0.04%
|
|
International Management Development Association
86 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Virtus Interpress
85 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Psychological Association (APA)
83 citations, 0.03%
|
|
AIP Publishing
82 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Brazilian Administration Review
80 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
76 citations, 0.03%
|
|
IntechOpen
76 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Haworth Press
76 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Inderscience Publishers
74 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Accounting Association
70 citations, 0.03%
|
|
China Science Publishing & Media
65 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Society for Quality
62 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Mackenzie Presbyterian University
62 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Hogrefe Publishing Group
59 citations, 0.02%
|
|
South Florida Publishing LLC
58 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Society of Transportation and Logistics
57 citations, 0.02%
|
|
F1000 Research
57 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Trans Tech Publications
55 citations, 0.02%
|
|
National Cheng Kung University
51 citations, 0.02%
|
|
OpenEdition
50 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Hans Publishers
50 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Culinary Science & Hospitality Research
48 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Editura Economica
46 citations, 0.02%
|
|
National Recreation and Park Association
45 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Universidade Federal de São Carlos
44 citations, 0.02%
|
|
European Academy of Management and Business Economics
43 citations, 0.02%
|
|
The Korea Contents Association
43 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Annual Reviews
41 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Consortium Erudit
39 citations, 0.02%
|
|
World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS)
39 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Universidad Icesi
34 citations, 0.01%
|
|
EJournal Publishing
31 citations, 0.01%
|
|
The Korean Society for Clothing Industry
31 citations, 0.01%
|
|
BMJ
30 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Akademiai Kiado
30 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Scandinavian University Press / Universitetsforlaget AS
30 citations, 0.01%
|
|
John Benjamins Publishing Company
29 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Wageningen Academic Publishers
28 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Vilnius University Press
27 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Publishing House Helvetica (Publications)
27 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Academic Journals
25 citations, 0.01%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
23 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Lavoisier
22 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Intellect
22 citations, 0.01%
|
|
University of Warsaw
21 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Association of Professional Managers in South Africa
21 citations, 0.01%
|
|
University of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Opatija
21 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Inovatus Usluge d.o.o.
21 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Japanese Association for Sport Management
21 citations, 0.01%
|
|
DMSP Research Center, Paris-Dauphine University
20 citations, 0.01%
|
|
PeerJ
19 citations, 0.01%
|
|
International Food and Agribusiness Management Association
18 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
18 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
16 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
|
Publishing organizations
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
|
|
Texas A&M University
76 publications, 2.86%
|
|
University of Miami
68 publications, 2.56%
|
|
Arizona State University
64 publications, 2.41%
|
|
Georgia State University
60 publications, 2.26%
|
|
Michigan State University
58 publications, 2.18%
|
|
University of Texas at Austin
54 publications, 2.03%
|
|
Indiana University Bloomington
51 publications, 1.92%
|
|
Florida State University
49 publications, 1.84%
|
|
University of Alabama
40 publications, 1.5%
|
|
University of Washington
37 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Louisiana State University
37 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of Tennessee
37 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Colorado State University
35 publications, 1.32%
|
|
Virginia Tech
35 publications, 1.32%
|
|
Iowa State University
34 publications, 1.28%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
31 publications, 1.17%
|
|
University of Mannheim
31 publications, 1.17%
|
|
Texas Tech University
31 publications, 1.17%
|
|
Boston College
29 publications, 1.09%
|
|
University of Arizona
26 publications, 0.98%
|
|
University of South Florida
26 publications, 0.98%
|
|
Texas Christian University
26 publications, 0.98%
|
|
University of Southern California
25 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Kentucky
25 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Memphis
25 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Queen's University at Kingston
24 publications, 0.9%
|
|
University of Houston
24 publications, 0.9%
|
|
University of Pennsylvania
23 publications, 0.87%
|
|
Clemson University
22 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
22 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Temple University
21 publications, 0.79%
|
|
Washington State University
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Northeastern University
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
University of Michigan
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Emory University
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
University of Maryland, College Park
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
Lehigh University
20 publications, 0.75%
|
|
University of Central Florida
19 publications, 0.71%
|
|
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
19 publications, 0.71%
|
|
Erasmus University Rotterdam
19 publications, 0.71%
|
|
University of Texas at Arlington
19 publications, 0.71%
|
|
Georgia Institute of technology
18 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
18 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Leeds
18 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Alabama at Birmingham
18 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Maastricht University
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Illinois at Chicago
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Case Western Reserve University
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
San Diego State University
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Dartmouth College
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Connecticut
17 publications, 0.64%
|
|
New York University
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Northern Illinois University
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Southern Methodist University
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
University of Notre Dame
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
University of Münster
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Baylor University
16 publications, 0.6%
|
|
University of New South Wales
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Ruhr University Bochum
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Minnesota
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Groningen
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Louisville
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Old Dominion University
15 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Melbourne
14 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
King's College London
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
Drexel University
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
Georgetown University
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
North Carolina State University
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
Wayne State University
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
Kansas State University
13 publications, 0.49%
|
|
University of Warwick
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Monash University
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
University of Missouri–Kansas City
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
George Mason University
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Bradley University
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Marquette University
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Portland State University
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
University of Bath
12 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Columbia University
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Northwestern University
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
University of Hong Kong
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Ohio State University
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
University at Buffalo, State University of New York
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
University of North Texas
11 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
National University of Singapore
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
George Washington University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
Boston University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
Auburn University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
West Virginia University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
University of California, Irvine
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
University of Cologne
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
University of Erlangen–Nuremberg
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
Florida Atlantic University
10 publications, 0.38%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
|
|
University of Washington
13 publications, 3.61%
|
|
Florida State University
11 publications, 3.06%
|
|
University of South Florida
11 publications, 3.06%
|
|
Louisiana State University
10 publications, 2.78%
|
|
Texas A&M University
10 publications, 2.78%
|
|
University of Alabama
10 publications, 2.78%
|
|
Indian Institute of Management Bangalore
9 publications, 2.5%
|
|
Colorado State University
9 publications, 2.5%
|
|
University of Texas at Austin
9 publications, 2.5%
|
|
Indiana University Bloomington
9 publications, 2.5%
|
|
University of Tennessee
9 publications, 2.5%
|
|
Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
King's College London
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
Arizona State University
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
Northeastern University
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
University of Groningen
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
University of Bath
8 publications, 2.22%
|
|
University of Warwick
7 publications, 1.94%
|
|
Michigan State University
7 publications, 1.94%
|
|
Boston College
7 publications, 1.94%
|
|
Texas Christian University
7 publications, 1.94%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
Clemson University
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
University of Mannheim
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
University of Leeds
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
Erasmus University Rotterdam
6 publications, 1.67%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Monash University
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of California, Irvine
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Ruhr University Bochum
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Dartmouth College
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Hamburg University
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of Münster
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
Tecnológico de Monterrey
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of Miami
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of Houston
5 publications, 1.39%
|
|
University of St. Gallen
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Technology Sydney
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Eastern Finland
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Copenhagen Business School
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Loughborough University
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Iowa State University
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Deakin University
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Hong Kong
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
George Mason University
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Vanderbilt University
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Rostock
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Pennsylvania
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
University of Alabama at Birmingham
4 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Radboud University Nijmegen
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Aalto University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Stockholm School of Economics
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of New South Wales
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Imperial College London
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Oxford
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Maastricht University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Bocconi University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Technical University of Dortmund
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Melbourne
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Griffith University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Boston University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Washington State University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Northwestern University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Missouri–Kansas City
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Virginia Tech
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
New York University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Arizona
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
San Diego State University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Notre Dame
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Cologne
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Erlangen–Nuremberg
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Kühne Logistics University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Tilburg University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Emory University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Zaragoza
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Lehigh University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Sussex
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
University of Denver
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Portland State University
3 publications, 0.83%
|
|
Indian Institute of Management Udaipur
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Zhejiang University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Ghent University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Free University of Berlin
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Eindhoven University of Technology
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Delft University of Technology
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Xiamen University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Renmin University of China
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Turku
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Durham University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Queen Mary University of London
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Vaasa
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Manchester
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
University of Southern California
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Drexel University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Sanming University
2 publications, 0.56%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
|
Publishing countries
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
|
USA
|
USA, 1881, 70.77%
USA
1881 publications, 70.77%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 159, 5.98%
Germany
159 publications, 5.98%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 135, 5.08%
Canada
135 publications, 5.08%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 124, 4.67%
United Kingdom
124 publications, 4.67%
|
China
|
China, 88, 3.31%
China
88 publications, 3.31%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 86, 3.24%
Netherlands
86 publications, 3.24%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 77, 2.9%
Australia
77 publications, 2.9%
|
France
|
France, 54, 2.03%
France
54 publications, 2.03%
|
India
|
India, 46, 1.73%
India
46 publications, 1.73%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 28, 1.05%
Norway
28 publications, 1.05%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 20, 0.75%
Switzerland
20 publications, 0.75%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 19, 0.71%
Belgium
19 publications, 0.71%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 19, 0.71%
Singapore
19 publications, 0.71%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 19, 0.71%
Finland
19 publications, 0.71%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 17, 0.64%
Spain
17 publications, 0.64%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 17, 0.64%
Italy
17 publications, 0.64%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 16, 0.6%
Republic of Korea
16 publications, 0.6%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 14, 0.53%
New Zealand
14 publications, 0.53%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 13, 0.49%
Austria
13 publications, 0.49%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 13, 0.49%
Israel
13 publications, 0.49%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 13, 0.49%
Turkey
13 publications, 0.49%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 12, 0.45%
Sweden
12 publications, 0.45%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 10, 0.38%
Denmark
10 publications, 0.38%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 8, 0.3%
Mexico
8 publications, 0.3%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 7, 0.26%
Ireland
7 publications, 0.26%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 6, 0.23%
Brazil
6 publications, 0.23%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 6, 0.23%
Greece
6 publications, 0.23%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 5, 0.19%
Portugal
5 publications, 0.19%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 4, 0.15%
Cyprus
4 publications, 0.15%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 4, 0.15%
Chile
4 publications, 0.15%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 3, 0.11%
UAE
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 3, 0.11%
Saudi Arabia
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 3, 0.11%
Thailand
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 3, 0.11%
Japan
3 publications, 0.11%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 2, 0.08%
Argentina
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 2, 0.08%
Vietnam
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Lithuania
|
Lithuania, 2, 0.08%
Lithuania
2 publications, 0.08%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.04%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 1, 0.04%
Egypt
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 1, 0.04%
Iraq
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 1, 0.04%
Kenya
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 1, 0.04%
Colombia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.04%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Luxembourg
|
Luxembourg, 1, 0.04%
Luxembourg
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 1, 0.04%
Poland
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Tunisia
|
Tunisia, 1, 0.04%
Tunisia
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Philippines
|
Philippines, 1, 0.04%
Philippines
1 publication, 0.04%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 1, 0.04%
South Africa
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Jamaica
|
Jamaica, 1, 0.04%
Jamaica
1 publication, 0.04%
|
Show all (19 more) | |
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
50
100
150
200
250
|
|
USA
|
USA, 222, 61.67%
USA
222 publications, 61.67%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 57, 15.83%
United Kingdom
57 publications, 15.83%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 53, 14.72%
Germany
53 publications, 14.72%
|
France
|
France, 31, 8.61%
France
31 publications, 8.61%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 30, 8.33%
Netherlands
30 publications, 8.33%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 24, 6.67%
Canada
24 publications, 6.67%
|
China
|
China, 23, 6.39%
China
23 publications, 6.39%
|
India
|
India, 22, 6.11%
India
22 publications, 6.11%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 21, 5.83%
Australia
21 publications, 5.83%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 14, 3.89%
Norway
14 publications, 3.89%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 10, 2.78%
Finland
10 publications, 2.78%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 9, 2.5%
Belgium
9 publications, 2.5%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 7, 1.94%
Spain
7 publications, 1.94%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 7, 1.94%
Italy
7 publications, 1.94%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 7, 1.94%
Switzerland
7 publications, 1.94%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 6, 1.67%
Sweden
6 publications, 1.67%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 5, 1.39%
Denmark
5 publications, 1.39%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 5, 1.39%
Mexico
5 publications, 1.39%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 4, 1.11%
Austria
4 publications, 1.11%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 4, 1.11%
Ireland
4 publications, 1.11%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 3, 0.83%
Brazil
3 publications, 0.83%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 3, 0.83%
Israel
3 publications, 0.83%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 3, 0.83%
Chile
3 publications, 0.83%
|
Lithuania
|
Lithuania, 2, 0.56%
Lithuania
2 publications, 0.56%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 2, 0.56%
New Zealand
2 publications, 0.56%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 2, 0.56%
UAE
2 publications, 0.56%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 2, 0.56%
Republic of Korea
2 publications, 0.56%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 2, 0.56%
Singapore
2 publications, 0.56%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.28%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 1, 0.28%
Portugal
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Vietnam
|
Vietnam, 1, 0.28%
Vietnam
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Kenya
|
Kenya, 1, 0.28%
Kenya
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 1, 0.28%
Cyprus
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Luxembourg
|
Luxembourg, 1, 0.28%
Luxembourg
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 1, 0.28%
Saudi Arabia
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 1, 0.28%
Thailand
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 1, 0.28%
Turkey
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 1, 0.28%
Japan
1 publication, 0.28%
|
Show all (8 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
|