CiteNScope — Scholarly Index & Analytics
Discover / Analytics RESEARCH INTELLIGENCE
CiteNScope / Analytics

Explore the evidence.
Understand the reach.

Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.

Compare journals ↗
OpenAlex coverage 100.0% · 3/3 recordsLast OpenAlex observation 22 Oct 2026, 07:53 UTC
PUBLICATIONS3In the selected collection
CROSSREF CITATIONS03/3 with known counts
OPENALEX CITATIONS23/3 with known counts
OPENALEX MEAN0.67Per article with a known count
Explore articles 3 →
Filter collection Publication years, search & more
Reset
country: Oman Remove ×
Your research collection

Output and reach

Publication activity alongside incoming citations.

Publication activity

Articles grouped by publication year

Publications

Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.

2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.

View data & coverage

Citations received

OpenAlex · year of the citing work

OpenAlex

Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.

2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.

View data & coverage

Research landscape

Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.

Full distributions & methodology ↓

Institutions

Sultan Qaboos University33/3 records with data

Countries

Oman33/3 records with data

Primary topics

Global Financial Crisis and Policies1Global Peace and Security Dynamics1Middle East Politics and Society13/3 records with data
Two perspectives on citations

Follow the research impact

Independent sources. Clear time scales.

Lifetime citations by publication year

Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts

Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.

Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.

View data & coverage

Citations received each year

OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year

OpenAlex

Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.

2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.

View data & coverage
Annual history: 3/3 articles. Latest history observation: 2026-10-22T07:53:36.002485+00:00. Source totals are never added together.
Research side by side

Compare journals

Compare across all journals →

Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.

Leave all unchecked to include every matching journal. Selection affects only comparison charts.
Display range
International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science

Publications

Articles by publication year

View data & coverage

Crossref citations

Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year

View data & coverage

OpenAlex citations

Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year

View data & coverage

OpenAlex · Citations received

By year of the citing work · 2017–2026

View data & coverage

2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.

Full analytics report All distributions, publications, comparisons & data provenance
3 MATCHING PUBLICATIONSExplore results →Export CSV ↓
INDEXED PUBLICATIONS3
CROSSREF CITATIONS0
CROSSREF · CITED PUBLICATIONS0.0%
CROSSREF · MEAN CITATIONS0.0

Crossref citation coverage: 3 / 3 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.

OpenAlex / Separate citation source

A broader view of this research

DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.

OPENALEX CITATIONS2
DOI MATCH COVERAGE100.0%3 / 3 publications
MEAN · KNOWN COUNTS ONLY0.673 known · 0 unknown
MEDIAN · KNOWN COUNTS ONLY1

Observation range: 22 Oct 2026 01:10 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 07:53 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.

OpenAlex citation distributionNo citations11–526–20021+0Unknown0

Institutions, countries & topics

OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.

Institutions

3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.

Countries

3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.

Primary topics

3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.

Citation year / OpenAlex

Citations received over time

Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.

The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.

Annual history available for 3 / 3 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.

Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-22T01:10:43.261930+00:00 — 2026-10-22T07:53:36.002485+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.

OpenAlex · Citations received by year

10.50 2017 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32018 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32019 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32020 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32021 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 1 · Annual history coverage 3/32022 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 1 · Annual history coverage 3/32023 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32024 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32025 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32026 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/3 2017201820192020202120222023202420252026
View openalex · citations received by year data & coverage
Citation yearJournal / scopeOpenAlex · Citations received by yearPublicationsAnnual history known
2017All selected publications033/3
2018All selected publications033/3
2019All selected publications033/3
2020All selected publications033/3
2021All selected publications133/3
2022All selected publications133/3
2023All selected publications033/3
2024All selected publications033/3
2025All selected publications033/3
2026All selected publications033/3

Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗

Crossref citation distribution

Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.

Mean0.0
Median0
No citations31–506–20021+0Unknown0

Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.

Journal comparison

Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.

Journal / publisherPublicationsCrossref citationsOpenAlex citationsOpenAlex coverageCrossref meanCrossref medianCrossref cited %*Crossref coverage
International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science
SSBFNET
3023/30.000.03/3 · 100.0%

* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.

Explore publications

View all 3 →

Most cited · Crossref

JOURNAL ARTICLE

China-U.S. Currency Conflict

Hani Albasoos · Hanan Hanan Al-Hadhrami

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

For more than a decade, China has a policy of managing its currency exchange rate (RMB) to limit its appreciation against other currencies like U.S dollar. This policy has been subjected to many criticisms from United States’ lawmakers as currency manipulation.  The U.S. argues that China is gaining an advantage of export and attracting direct foreign investment at the expense of other countries including the United State. The claim also has included that China’s manipulation causes U.S. trade deficit as well as high rate of unemployment. Meanwhile, China’s policy makers argue that its policy of exchange rate is a mechanism tool to enhance the development of the country and attaining market growth to make China rich and powerful. This research paper underlines the root of this argument and how china’s currency policy has affected both economics of U.S. and China. Many economists have emphasized on the appreciation of RMB as an important factor to attain the trade balance. However, this research argues that the appreciation is not going to matter. Pressure has been put on Obama’s Administration to push China to appreciate its currency and to designate China as a "currency manipulator". Several Bills have been introduced to discuss this issue.From a legal perspective, two entities could tackle this issue. They are the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, IMF lack legitimacy and leverage and WTO has no jurisdiction over the exchange rate. So, none of these entities could handle the currency issue. Therefore, this paper analyzes some possible solutions such as Omnibus Act, tariffs, import quotas and forming new legislation. Where, it concludes that the best solution could be via forming a new international agency.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i6.5750 Crossref citations1 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Crisis of Legitimacy in Palestine

Hani Albasoos

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

Palestinian society is geographically separated and politically fragmented. This is attributed to partisan affiliation and alignment, absence of conceptual and professional framework of civil society, unethical approach of Palestinian political leaders, and unconstitutional political institutions. Such polarization and division have created political antagonism within elites and between factions. The broad objective of this research is to investigate the legitimacy crisis in Palestine, the current political dilemma in the Palestinian Authority, and the public response to the situation. The research introduces direct and thorough understanding of the developing political context surrounding these issues; taking into consideration that growing deficit in legitimacy could create potentially dire consequences, particularly if present trends on the ground continue. The research promotes an analytical perspective based on legitimacy theory and exploring recent public opinion polls.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i3.2460 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Evolution Dilemma of the United Nations

Cuneyt M Yenigun

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

The United Nations (UN), despite some successful stories, has largely failed to safeguard international peace and security, particularly in the Middle East since its establishment. The UN’s inability to effectively resolve international conflicts is due to the Security Council (UNSC)’s decision making-process. The power to block any initiatives that do not fit the interest of any of the five permanent members (P5: US, UK, France, Russia, China) have impeded the UN’s ability to take effectively take actions where it is needed in safeguarding security in the Middle East. The nature of the veto power no longer reflects the reality of the 21st century; the UN is frozen in the context of the post-Second World War era and has failed to evolve with the international community.  Double standards in the International Court of Justice's decrees and infirmity of purpose of the UNSC overshadow the legitimacy of the organization, jeopardizing its security mission, and clashes with the democratic values in world public opinion. The UN should change to earn legitimacy and efficiency of preserving international peace and security by amending decision making system in the UNSC or changing decision-making organ within the UN. The Secretary General’s diplomatic activism and attempts to fill the gap left by the P5 infightings could not succeed because of the resistance of the UNSC’s permanent members to change and lack of integrity among the other states. To ensure democratic transformation of the UN today, all states, NGOs and think tanks should work together. This study discusses the system's current shortcomings and suggests some alternative paths for the effective transformation of the UN as a supranational security institution.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i1.2450 Crossref citations1 OpenAlex citations

Selected results

JOURNAL ARTICLE

China-U.S. Currency Conflict

Hani Albasoos · Hanan Hanan Al-Hadhrami

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

For more than a decade, China has a policy of managing its currency exchange rate (RMB) to limit its appreciation against other currencies like U.S dollar. This policy has been subjected to many criticisms from United States’ lawmakers as currency manipulation.  The U.S. argues that China is gaining an advantage of export and attracting direct foreign investment at the expense of other countries including the United State. The claim also has included that China’s manipulation causes U.S. trade deficit as well as high rate of unemployment. Meanwhile, China’s policy makers argue that its policy of exchange rate is a mechanism tool to enhance the development of the country and attaining market growth to make China rich and powerful. This research paper underlines the root of this argument and how china’s currency policy has affected both economics of U.S. and China. Many economists have emphasized on the appreciation of RMB as an important factor to attain the trade balance. However, this research argues that the appreciation is not going to matter. Pressure has been put on Obama’s Administration to push China to appreciate its currency and to designate China as a "currency manipulator". Several Bills have been introduced to discuss this issue.From a legal perspective, two entities could tackle this issue. They are the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, IMF lack legitimacy and leverage and WTO has no jurisdiction over the exchange rate. So, none of these entities could handle the currency issue. Therefore, this paper analyzes some possible solutions such as Omnibus Act, tariffs, import quotas and forming new legislation. Where, it concludes that the best solution could be via forming a new international agency.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i6.5750 Crossref citations1 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Crisis of Legitimacy in Palestine

Hani Albasoos

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

Palestinian society is geographically separated and politically fragmented. This is attributed to partisan affiliation and alignment, absence of conceptual and professional framework of civil society, unethical approach of Palestinian political leaders, and unconstitutional political institutions. Such polarization and division have created political antagonism within elites and between factions. The broad objective of this research is to investigate the legitimacy crisis in Palestine, the current political dilemma in the Palestinian Authority, and the public response to the situation. The research introduces direct and thorough understanding of the developing political context surrounding these issues; taking into consideration that growing deficit in legitimacy could create potentially dire consequences, particularly if present trends on the ground continue. The research promotes an analytical perspective based on legitimacy theory and exploring recent public opinion polls.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i3.2460 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Evolution Dilemma of the United Nations

Cuneyt M Yenigun

International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science · 2016

Read abstract

The United Nations (UN), despite some successful stories, has largely failed to safeguard international peace and security, particularly in the Middle East since its establishment. The UN’s inability to effectively resolve international conflicts is due to the Security Council (UNSC)’s decision making-process. The power to block any initiatives that do not fit the interest of any of the five permanent members (P5: US, UK, France, Russia, China) have impeded the UN’s ability to take effectively take actions where it is needed in safeguarding security in the Middle East. The nature of the veto power no longer reflects the reality of the 21st century; the UN is frozen in the context of the post-Second World War era and has failed to evolve with the international community.  Double standards in the International Court of Justice's decrees and infirmity of purpose of the UNSC overshadow the legitimacy of the organization, jeopardizing its security mission, and clashes with the democratic values in world public opinion. The UN should change to earn legitimacy and efficiency of preserving international peace and security by amending decision making system in the UNSC or changing decision-making organ within the UN. The Secretary General’s diplomatic activism and attempts to fill the gap left by the P5 infightings could not succeed because of the resistance of the UNSC’s permanent members to change and lack of integrity among the other states. To ensure democratic transformation of the UN today, all states, NGOs and think tanks should work together. This study discusses the system's current shortcomings and suggests some alternative paths for the effective transformation of the UN as a supranational security institution.

DOI 10.20525/ijrbs.v5i1.2450 Crossref citations1 OpenAlex citations

Data coverage & freshness

Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.

Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0

SourceMost recent successful journal syncLatest attempt
crossref21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbscomplete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC
ojs-rest21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbscomplete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC
oai-pmh20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbscomplete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC
openalex-enrichment21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbscomplete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC
Full import history & methodology →