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: 4 / 4 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 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: 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 04:46 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.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 3 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | All selected publications | 7 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 4 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
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 4 / 4 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:44.548398+00:00 — 2026-10-22T04:46:45.457661+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 | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 2 |
| 2022 | 1 |
| 2023 | 1 |
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 Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 4 | 7 | 13 | 4/4 | 1.75 | 1.5 | 100.0 | 4/4 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Social interaction among peers and teachers in English First Additional Language (EFAL) classrooms is a more significant predictor of communicative competence, which is the goal of any language program. During the Covid-19, there was a decline in social interaction among learners due to the sudden change from onsite to remote teaching and learning. This paper aimed to explore the effects of lack of social interaction in EFAL classrooms and how it can be enhanced during the 'New Normal'. This study was underpinned by Long's (1981) Interaction Hypothesis Theory, which emphasizes social interaction as an essential component of language learning. This study adopted a qualitative approach embedded in an interpretive paradigm. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were utilized to gather data from 32 conveniently selected participants. Data were analyzed through content analysis. The findings of this paper indicated that the effects of lack of social interaction were; the inability to solicit information from learners, lack of direct contact, and lack of immediate feedback, which were caused by the COVID-19 social distancing measures. This negatively affected the quality of education. Furthermore, the lack of interactive social activities in EFAL classrooms threatens the acquisition of language proficiency skills, which are key to academic literacy. Therefore, the authors recommend that language teachers receive training on how language lessons should be planned during blended learning to engage learners in interactive social activities like role-playing, storytelling, debates, and group discussions.
The essay is a typical task provided in schools to evaluate learner’s writing abilities and newly acquired knowledge. Because of how text-oriented the world has become, writing has been regarded as one of the most important abilities. As a result, teachers are in tremendous need of efficient methods to boost writing abilities in their classrooms. Yet, most learners lack the ability to write an English essay, particularly in remote areas. The aim of the study is to investigate the underlying reasons for the difficulties teachers encounter while attempting to teach English writing skills in rural schools of OR Tambo Inland District, Eastern Cape Province. The Zone of Proximal Development is highlighted as the issue of collaboration in the education system in order to develop children’s creative writing. Therefore, the study adopted socio-cultural theory as the theoretical framework. The study also adopted a quantitative research method. The participants of the study included six language teachers that were purposefully selected as information-rich participants. The findings of the study revealed that (i) teachers were lacking inappropriate methods, (II) the time spent in teaching essay writing was grossly inadequate, and finally (III) teachers experienced many challenges in reading and writing skills, which included, difficulty in motivating their learners, learners of diverse levels, difficult materials and time constraints to teach the learners. Therefore, the study recommended the use of pre-taught vocabulary, various teacher influences and the implementation of positive literacy practices.
It is recognized that reading ability is essential for Thai EFL students and English reading is perceived as a difficult task among them. To understand the difficulty experienced by the students while reading English text, this study hence aimed at investigating problems of using English reading strategies perceived by Thai EFL students as well as providing suggested reading instructions for Thai lecturers to cope with the emerging problems. This study employed a mixed-method design. The participants of the study were 412 Thai EFL students who, in this study, were also considered as Gen Z students at a large-size university in Bangkok, Thailand. The participants were asked to complete an online questionnaire on 4-point Likert’s scale, which was adapted from Aebersold and Field (1997). Moreover, 10 students were recruited for two focus group interviews. The results revealed that Thai EFL students experience difficulties in using English reading strategies when they have to skip unknown words during the first reading (mean = 2.67, SD = 1.01) followed by varying reading speed rates according to the type of the reading passage (mean = 2.66, SD = 0.97), and guessing the meanings of unknown words by using the context clues (mean = 2.59, SD = 0.92) respectively. Based on both quantitative and qualitative results and personality traits of Thai Gen Z, suggested reading instructions including guided reading, improving student’s vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension, technology-blended classroom and critical reading were purposed.
The Second Language (L2) research has presented vast curiosity to learners and their judgments on L2. The numerous directions of learner-focus study, however, have not been sufficient to emphasize the learning experiences of learners in relation to their social and economic context, particularly in third world countries. This research explores the perspectives and experiences of school learners in second language learning in the peripheries of Bangladesh. In addition, this research demonstrates how socio-economic drawbacks of students’ family affect their English subject scores in secondary school certificate examination. Educational background of parents also contributes to achieve the better scores in L2. A close relationship is found between learners’ family education, parents’ occupation, and family income and their achieved scores in English in board examination.
The essay is a typical task provided in schools to evaluate learner’s writing abilities and newly acquired knowledge. Because of how text-oriented the world has become, writing has been regarded as one of the most important abilities. As a result, teachers are in tremendous need of efficient methods to boost writing abilities in their classrooms. Yet, most learners lack the ability to write an English essay, particularly in remote areas. The aim of the study is to investigate the underlying reasons for the difficulties teachers encounter while attempting to teach English writing skills in rural schools of OR Tambo Inland District, Eastern Cape Province. The Zone of Proximal Development is highlighted as the issue of collaboration in the education system in order to develop children’s creative writing. Therefore, the study adopted socio-cultural theory as the theoretical framework. The study also adopted a quantitative research method. The participants of the study included six language teachers that were purposefully selected as information-rich participants. The findings of the study revealed that (i) teachers were lacking inappropriate methods, (II) the time spent in teaching essay writing was grossly inadequate, and finally (III) teachers experienced many challenges in reading and writing skills, which included, difficulty in motivating their learners, learners of diverse levels, difficult materials and time constraints to teach the learners. Therefore, the study recommended the use of pre-taught vocabulary, various teacher influences and the implementation of positive literacy practices.
Social interaction among peers and teachers in English First Additional Language (EFAL) classrooms is a more significant predictor of communicative competence, which is the goal of any language program. During the Covid-19, there was a decline in social interaction among learners due to the sudden change from onsite to remote teaching and learning. This paper aimed to explore the effects of lack of social interaction in EFAL classrooms and how it can be enhanced during the 'New Normal'. This study was underpinned by Long's (1981) Interaction Hypothesis Theory, which emphasizes social interaction as an essential component of language learning. This study adopted a qualitative approach embedded in an interpretive paradigm. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were utilized to gather data from 32 conveniently selected participants. Data were analyzed through content analysis. The findings of this paper indicated that the effects of lack of social interaction were; the inability to solicit information from learners, lack of direct contact, and lack of immediate feedback, which were caused by the COVID-19 social distancing measures. This negatively affected the quality of education. Furthermore, the lack of interactive social activities in EFAL classrooms threatens the acquisition of language proficiency skills, which are key to academic literacy. Therefore, the authors recommend that language teachers receive training on how language lessons should be planned during blended learning to engage learners in interactive social activities like role-playing, storytelling, debates, and group discussions.
It is recognized that reading ability is essential for Thai EFL students and English reading is perceived as a difficult task among them. To understand the difficulty experienced by the students while reading English text, this study hence aimed at investigating problems of using English reading strategies perceived by Thai EFL students as well as providing suggested reading instructions for Thai lecturers to cope with the emerging problems. This study employed a mixed-method design. The participants of the study were 412 Thai EFL students who, in this study, were also considered as Gen Z students at a large-size university in Bangkok, Thailand. The participants were asked to complete an online questionnaire on 4-point Likert’s scale, which was adapted from Aebersold and Field (1997). Moreover, 10 students were recruited for two focus group interviews. The results revealed that Thai EFL students experience difficulties in using English reading strategies when they have to skip unknown words during the first reading (mean = 2.67, SD = 1.01) followed by varying reading speed rates according to the type of the reading passage (mean = 2.66, SD = 0.97), and guessing the meanings of unknown words by using the context clues (mean = 2.59, SD = 0.92) respectively. Based on both quantitative and qualitative results and personality traits of Thai Gen Z, suggested reading instructions including guided reading, improving student’s vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension, technology-blended classroom and critical reading were purposed.
The Second Language (L2) research has presented vast curiosity to learners and their judgments on L2. The numerous directions of learner-focus study, however, have not been sufficient to emphasize the learning experiences of learners in relation to their social and economic context, particularly in third world countries. This research explores the perspectives and experiences of school learners in second language learning in the peripheries of Bangladesh. In addition, this research demonstrates how socio-economic drawbacks of students’ family affect their English subject scores in secondary school certificate examination. Educational background of parents also contributes to achieve the better scores in L2. A close relationship is found between learners’ family education, parents’ occupation, and family income and their achieved scores in English in board examination.
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 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |