Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
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.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
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.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
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.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
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.
Crossref citation coverage: 6 / 6 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 00:21 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 28 Oct 2026 21:32 UTC — 29 Oct 2026 16:44 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
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.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 selected publications.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 selected publications.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | All selected publications | 10 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | All selected publications | 35 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
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 6 / 6 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): 2026-10-28T21:32:44.894118+00:00 — 2026-10-29T16:44:06.669330+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 1 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 1 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 3 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 1 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 5 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 6 | 6/6 |
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 ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 6 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 6 | 10 | 35 | 6/6 | 1.67 | 0.5 | 50.0 | 6/6 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This paper investigates how firms shifted their dividend policies and leverage policies in response to the economic shock caused by the 2008 financial crisis. The sample countries are United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Japan, China, and Korea. The empirical relationship of firms’ dividend policies with their capital structures and earnings was likely to undergo a major change around the 2008 financial crisis, as firms adjusted their capital structures and dividend policies in response to the extreme credit crunch caused by the financial crisis. The extent and the speed that firms deleverage themselves and reduce their dividends were likely to be influenced by countries’ cultural and social norms. This paper finds a significant reduction in dividends across sample countries except Great Britain and France after the 2008 crisis. This finding supports the free cash flow theory that dividends are paid to dissipate free cash flow to address agency conflicts between managers and shareholders. This paper finds a higher correlation between dividends and leverages before the 2008 crisis, and that it strengthened after the crisis except Great Britain and Korea. This finding is consistent more with the pecking order theory than with the trade-off theory of leverage.
By drawing on Ukrainian experience, this paper analyzes the anatomy of bank efficiency in a transitional economy. Acknowledging the vast disparities in the business technology of different size banks, in this comprehensive study, we innovatively estimate group-specific (distinct) frontiers for small, medium, and large size banks. The results from separate frontiers reveal that Ukrainian banks record 38% technical inefficiency, 26% pure technical inefficiency, and 17% scale inefficiency on average. Apparently, banks in transition waste about the two fifths of their factor inputs during the production of financial services. The cardinal source of sub-performance in transitional banks seems to be managerial inefficiencies. We also found that banks operating in areas with more political influence and more developed infrastructure outperform the banks operating in politically and economically weaker regions. The results also indicate that larger banks, enjoying public trust in a risky business climate, dominate smaller banks in all forms of efficiency. However, such bias for size causes large banks to suffer from decreasing returns to scale and small banks from idle capacity. Consequently, the policies promoting consolidation between small and large banks may alleviate the excess (idle) capacity for large (small) banks in a transitional economy.
Nowadays, one of the leading factors used in the evaluation of a country’s economic development is energy consumption. Because of economic growth, demand for energy is also increasing. In this study, the emerging European countries’ (the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Turkey) and the CIS countries’ (Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan) electricity consumption has been forecasted for five years period (2015-2019). In the study, GM(1,1) Rolling Model, which is developed in the framework of Grey System Theory is used as a mathematical model for real-time forecasting. The results of the study show that there will not be a significant change in electricity demand in this two area during the 2015-2109 period.
A nascent literature in finance and accounting on tail risk in individual stock returns concludes that bad news hoarding by corporate managers engenders sudden, extreme crashes in a firm’s stock price when the bad news is eventually made public. This literature finds that firm-specific crash risk is higher among firms with more severe asymmetric information and agency problems. A hitherto disjointed literature spanning the fields of international business, finance, and accounting suggests that geographic dispersion in a firm’s operations, and especially dispersion across different countries, gives rise to organizational complexities and greater costs of monitoring that can exacerbate asymmetric information and agency problems. Motivated by the confluence of arguments and findings from these two strands of literature, this paper examines whether stock price crash risk is higher among multinational firms than domestic firms. Using a large sample of U.S. headquartered firms during 1987-2011, we find robust evidence that multinational firms are significantly more likely to crash than domestic firms. Moreover, we show that the difference in crash risk between multinational and domestic firms is most acute among firms with weaker corporate governance mechanisms, including weaker shareholder rights, less independent boards, and less stable institutional ownership. Our analysis indicates that stronger monitoring from each of these three governance mechanisms significantly attenuates the positive relation between crash risk and multinationality. Our findings are robust to the use of alternative measures of crash risk and to controlling for known determinants of crash risk identified in prior studies. Our study offers new insights that should hold value for scholars and market participants interested in understanding the implications of heighted agency problems that multinational firms are likely to encounter and scholars and market participants interested in developing models that more accurately predict tail risk in the equity returns of individual firms.
Over the past fifty years, economic growth in emerging markets has been supported by investments in capital and technology from the developed world. The benefit of this development for the emerging markets, as measured by growth in income, employment, and wealth, is immediately apparent. There have also been significant advantages for the developed world through opportunities for higher risk adjusted returns from investments in emerging markets. This study explores the benefits of the diversification of global government bond portfolio, and provides complete performance evaluations of DMs with or without South Africa emerging market (SAEM) bonds. The study examines the benefits of inclusion of SAEM bonds in DMs, the degrees of financial integration among the research markets, the relative bond returns of dynamic factor models with time-varying coefficients and the robust tests of bond portfolio performance between DMs with SAEM and bond index. The results of this study provide important implications for global investors by identifying diversification gains in SAEM.
Nowadays, one of the leading factors used in the evaluation of a country’s economic development is energy consumption. Because of economic growth, demand for energy is also increasing. In this study, the emerging European countries’ (the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Turkey) and the CIS countries’ (Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan) electricity consumption has been forecasted for five years period (2015-2019). In the study, GM(1,1) Rolling Model, which is developed in the framework of Grey System Theory is used as a mathematical model for real-time forecasting. The results of the study show that there will not be a significant change in electricity demand in this two area during the 2015-2109 period.
This paper investigates how firms shifted their dividend policies and leverage policies in response to the economic shock caused by the 2008 financial crisis. The sample countries are United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Japan, China, and Korea. The empirical relationship of firms’ dividend policies with their capital structures and earnings was likely to undergo a major change around the 2008 financial crisis, as firms adjusted their capital structures and dividend policies in response to the extreme credit crunch caused by the financial crisis. The extent and the speed that firms deleverage themselves and reduce their dividends were likely to be influenced by countries’ cultural and social norms. This paper finds a significant reduction in dividends across sample countries except Great Britain and France after the 2008 crisis. This finding supports the free cash flow theory that dividends are paid to dissipate free cash flow to address agency conflicts between managers and shareholders. This paper finds a higher correlation between dividends and leverages before the 2008 crisis, and that it strengthened after the crisis except Great Britain and Korea. This finding is consistent more with the pecking order theory than with the trade-off theory of leverage.
A nascent literature in finance and accounting on tail risk in individual stock returns concludes that bad news hoarding by corporate managers engenders sudden, extreme crashes in a firm’s stock price when the bad news is eventually made public. This literature finds that firm-specific crash risk is higher among firms with more severe asymmetric information and agency problems. A hitherto disjointed literature spanning the fields of international business, finance, and accounting suggests that geographic dispersion in a firm’s operations, and especially dispersion across different countries, gives rise to organizational complexities and greater costs of monitoring that can exacerbate asymmetric information and agency problems. Motivated by the confluence of arguments and findings from these two strands of literature, this paper examines whether stock price crash risk is higher among multinational firms than domestic firms. Using a large sample of U.S. headquartered firms during 1987-2011, we find robust evidence that multinational firms are significantly more likely to crash than domestic firms. Moreover, we show that the difference in crash risk between multinational and domestic firms is most acute among firms with weaker corporate governance mechanisms, including weaker shareholder rights, less independent boards, and less stable institutional ownership. Our analysis indicates that stronger monitoring from each of these three governance mechanisms significantly attenuates the positive relation between crash risk and multinationality. Our findings are robust to the use of alternative measures of crash risk and to controlling for known determinants of crash risk identified in prior studies. Our study offers new insights that should hold value for scholars and market participants interested in understanding the implications of heighted agency problems that multinational firms are likely to encounter and scholars and market participants interested in developing models that more accurately predict tail risk in the equity returns of individual firms.
Over the past fifty years, economic growth in emerging markets has been supported by investments in capital and technology from the developed world. The benefit of this development for the emerging markets, as measured by growth in income, employment, and wealth, is immediately apparent. There have also been significant advantages for the developed world through opportunities for higher risk adjusted returns from investments in emerging markets. This study explores the benefits of the diversification of global government bond portfolio, and provides complete performance evaluations of DMs with or without South Africa emerging market (SAEM) bonds. The study examines the benefits of inclusion of SAEM bonds in DMs, the degrees of financial integration among the research markets, the relative bond returns of dynamic factor models with time-varying coefficients and the robust tests of bond portfolio performance between DMs with SAEM and bond index. The results of this study provide important implications for global investors by identifying diversification gains in SAEM.
By drawing on Ukrainian experience, this paper analyzes the anatomy of bank efficiency in a transitional economy. Acknowledging the vast disparities in the business technology of different size banks, in this comprehensive study, we innovatively estimate group-specific (distinct) frontiers for small, medium, and large size banks. The results from separate frontiers reveal that Ukrainian banks record 38% technical inefficiency, 26% pure technical inefficiency, and 17% scale inefficiency on average. Apparently, banks in transition waste about the two fifths of their factor inputs during the production of financial services. The cardinal source of sub-performance in transitional banks seems to be managerial inefficiencies. We also found that banks operating in areas with more political influence and more developed infrastructure outperform the banks operating in politically and economically weaker regions. The results also indicate that larger banks, enjoying public trust in a risky business climate, dominate smaller banks in all forms of efficiency. However, such bias for size causes large banks to suffer from decreasing returns to scale and small banks from idle capacity. Consequently, the policies promoting consolidation between small and large banks may alleviate the excess (idle) capacity for large (small) banks in a transitional economy.
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
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 00:22 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |