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: 2 / 2 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 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:22 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.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
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 2 / 2 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): 2026-10-21T00:14:29.385018+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:22:57.905518+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 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2024 | 2 |
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 Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1/1 | 3.0 | 3 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1/1 | 2.0 | 2 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This study examines the efficacy of using smartphones for teaching and learning in higher education, with a particular emphasis on undergraduates and blended learning. It is vital to investigate how cellphones, favored by Generation Z and Millennials, might improve academic achievement because the COVID-19 epidemic required a change from traditional teaching approaches to accommodate remote and online learning. The scholarly article explores smartphones' potential as an effective teaching and learning aid by conducting a theoretical investigation. Understanding how these tools can promote learning outcomes is crucial given the prevalence of smartphones and our escalating reliance on digital technologies. This systematic literature review aims to shed light on the potential benefits and challenges associated with integrating smartphones into the educational process for undergraduate students within the Higher Institutional learning environment of the University of Technology (UoT). Drawing upon peer-reviewed articles and studies published from early 2020 to the present, the review critically examines the advantages and drawbacks of smartphone usage, investigates undergraduate preferences, and assesses the implications for teaching and learning methodologies. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the efficacy of smartphones in enhancing teaching and learning outcomes, emphasizing their positive impact on student engagement, academic achievement, and overall satisfaction within blended learning environments. The review offers practical recommendations for educators to promote greater student engagement by prioritizing individual needs and leveraging digital resources to foster creativity and innovation.
This qualitative study intentionally gathered insights from 12 educators of varying seniority across three schools in the Nkangala Education District, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, regarding their experiences with mobile learning (facilitated through Microsoft Teams and WhatsApp Messenger) as a professional development and knowledge retention tool during the Covid-19 pandemic. The findings, derived from semi-structured interviews and document analysis, indicated that young educators positively embraced the implementation of Microsoft Teams and WhatsApp Messenger. Senior educators deemed WhatsApp Messenger less intimidating than Microsoft Teams, thereby endorsing it as the preferred medium for professional growth and knowledge retention. This led to a lack of incentive among senior educators to participate in the professional learning events facilitated by Microsoft Teams. Thus, they depended on the supplemental learning information disseminated via WhatsApp Messenger as the principal method for professional development and knowledge retention activities. The research identified multiple obstacles to utilising mobile learning for professional development and knowledge retention, specifically: insufficient ICT skills among senior educators, ineffective content facilitation by subject advisors, and inadequate communication and scheduling of professional development programs. The study advocated for a systematic coordination of: 1) a series of ICT skills training for underqualified educators; 2) peer teaching among novice, mid-career, and senior educators to address internal skills deficiencies; 3) effective communication among the district, circuits, and schools; and 4) skills audits for subject advisors to enhance competency in areas of deficiency. By presenting these recommendations, the report alerts schools, circuits, and districts to the likelihood that the Covid-19-induced adoption of hybrid professional development will become the standard practice.
This qualitative study intentionally gathered insights from 12 educators of varying seniority across three schools in the Nkangala Education District, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, regarding their experiences with mobile learning (facilitated through Microsoft Teams and WhatsApp Messenger) as a professional development and knowledge retention tool during the Covid-19 pandemic. The findings, derived from semi-structured interviews and document analysis, indicated that young educators positively embraced the implementation of Microsoft Teams and WhatsApp Messenger. Senior educators deemed WhatsApp Messenger less intimidating than Microsoft Teams, thereby endorsing it as the preferred medium for professional growth and knowledge retention. This led to a lack of incentive among senior educators to participate in the professional learning events facilitated by Microsoft Teams. Thus, they depended on the supplemental learning information disseminated via WhatsApp Messenger as the principal method for professional development and knowledge retention activities. The research identified multiple obstacles to utilising mobile learning for professional development and knowledge retention, specifically: insufficient ICT skills among senior educators, ineffective content facilitation by subject advisors, and inadequate communication and scheduling of professional development programs. The study advocated for a systematic coordination of: 1) a series of ICT skills training for underqualified educators; 2) peer teaching among novice, mid-career, and senior educators to address internal skills deficiencies; 3) effective communication among the district, circuits, and schools; and 4) skills audits for subject advisors to enhance competency in areas of deficiency. By presenting these recommendations, the report alerts schools, circuits, and districts to the likelihood that the Covid-19-induced adoption of hybrid professional development will become the standard practice.
This study examines the efficacy of using smartphones for teaching and learning in higher education, with a particular emphasis on undergraduates and blended learning. It is vital to investigate how cellphones, favored by Generation Z and Millennials, might improve academic achievement because the COVID-19 epidemic required a change from traditional teaching approaches to accommodate remote and online learning. The scholarly article explores smartphones' potential as an effective teaching and learning aid by conducting a theoretical investigation. Understanding how these tools can promote learning outcomes is crucial given the prevalence of smartphones and our escalating reliance on digital technologies. This systematic literature review aims to shed light on the potential benefits and challenges associated with integrating smartphones into the educational process for undergraduate students within the Higher Institutional learning environment of the University of Technology (UoT). Drawing upon peer-reviewed articles and studies published from early 2020 to the present, the review critically examines the advantages and drawbacks of smartphone usage, investigates undergraduate preferences, and assesses the implications for teaching and learning methodologies. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the efficacy of smartphones in enhancing teaching and learning outcomes, emphasizing their positive impact on student engagement, academic achievement, and overall satisfaction within blended learning environments. The review offers practical recommendations for educators to promote greater student engagement by prioritizing individual needs and leveraging digital resources to foster creativity and innovation.
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 |