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, 02:45 UTC
PUBLICATIONS3In the selected collection
CROSSREF CITATIONS03/3 with known counts
OPENALEX CITATIONS03/3 with known counts
OPENALEX MEAN0.0Per article with a known count
Explore articles 3 →
Filter collection Publication years, search & more
Reset
topic: Educational Technology and E-Learning 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

University of KwaZulu-Natal3Production Management Institute of Southern Africa13/3 records with data

Countries

South Africa33/3 records with data

Primary topics

Educational Technology and E-Learning33/3 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: 2026-10-22T02:45:21.292141+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 Business Ecosystem & Strategy

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, 00:14 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 CITATIONS0
DOI MATCH COVERAGE100.0%3 / 3 publications
MEAN · KNOWN COUNTS ONLY0.03 known · 0 unknown
MEDIAN · KNOWN COUNTS ONLY0

Observation range: 22 Oct 2026 01:12 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 02:45 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.

OpenAlex citation distributionNo citations31–506–20021+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): 2026-10-22T01:12:10.314540+00:00 — 2026-10-22T02:45:21.292141+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: 0 · Annual history coverage 3/32022 · All selected publications · OpenAlex · Citations received by year: 0 · 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 publications033/3
2022All selected publications033/3
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 Business Ecosystem & Strategy
Bussecon International Academy
3003/30.000.03/3 · 100.0%

* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.

Explore publications

View all 3 →

Most cited · Crossref

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Using Moodle as a Learning Management System (LMS) for e-learning: Lecturer experiences in a developing country during the pandemic

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

E-learning tools and LMSs, such as Moodle, have been in existence for decades. However, there has been an accelerated use of such platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Providers responded to ensure that education was accessible via online platforms to allow lecturers to continue their daily job functions during the pandemic. This study explores these aspects from a lecturer perspective during COVID-19, using constructs from the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework and Unified Theory of Use and Acceptance of Technology (UTAUT-3) theory. This study is based on the pragmatist paradigm. This methodology was deemed appropriate as this study uses a mixed methodology for collecting and analysing qualitative and quantitative data. The objective of the study was to understand the experiences of lecturers using Moodle for e-learning in a learning journey at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution during the pandemic. The results revealed that several lecturers appeared to have adaptation challenges when using Moodle, but thereafter the system performed as expected. Overall lecturers found that Moodle promoted accessibility and performed as expected. The research further revealed that that there was insufficient training and support provided by the institution. Recommendations arising from the findings included, amongst others, upgrading internet packages and investing in backup power supplies to enhance the experience of lecturers in this learning journey. Recommendations for the institution included enhancing support and communication to lecturers especially part-time lecturers as they are not part of the formal institutional structure on a day-to-day basis.  More comprehensive training to lecturers is required to ensure lecturers are adequately equipped to improve online learning and student engagement.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i5.9490 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Moodle use in South African distance education: A UTAUT-3 – based exploration on student and lecturer perspective

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic countries all over the world underwent hard lockdowns that limited face-to-face contact in everyday aspects of our lives. Higher Education Providers responded to ensure that education was accessible via online platforms to allow students to continue their studies during the pandemic. Due to this Learning Management Systems (LMSs) were no longer merely used for uploading or downloading content and instead was used for completing online courses including submitting assignments, conducting examinations and lectures. Thus, using an LMS became the only means of survival for many educational intuitions during the pandemic. The study used the qualitative method for collecting and analyzing data by conducting one on one interviews via MS Teams. The objective of the study was to explore which functionalities of Moodle were used for e-learning in a learning journey at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution in a COVID-19 environment and why. Based on this objective, the following research question was posed: Which functionalities of Moodle do lecturers and students use when using Moodle for e-learning in a learning journey and what are the reasons for their choice? The results revealed that despite having multiple functionalities available only limited functionalities were used by both lecturers and students. It was identified that usage on Moodle was motivated by UTAUT-3 constructs such as Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Hedonic Motivation and Facilitating Conditions. The research further revealed that students and lecturers may not have understood how to use all the functionalities available hence usage was limited.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i4.8550 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Using Moodle as a Learning Management System (LMS) for e-learning: student experiences in a developing country during the Pandemic

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of e-learning platforms globally, particularly Learning Management Systems (LMS) such as Moodle, which became essential tools for facilitating online learning in higher education. This study explores the experiences of MBA students using Moodle at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution in a developing country during the pandemic. Drawing on the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT-3), the study employed a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative data from questionnaires and qualitative data from interviews. Findings revealed that while students faced initial adaptation challenges, Moodle was perceived as a user-friendly, flexible, and cost-effective platform that facilitated their learning experience. However, students encountered significant challenges, including internet connectivity issues and power outages, which impacted their ability to engage fully with the platform. Recommendations include improving internet infrastructure, providing uninterrupted power supplies, and offering enhanced technical support to ensure seamless learning experiences. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on e-learning in developing countries, offering insights into the effectiveness of LMS platforms in distance education and highlighting areas for improvement in future e-learning implementations.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i2.7010 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations

Selected results

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Using Moodle as a Learning Management System (LMS) for e-learning: Lecturer experiences in a developing country during the pandemic

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

E-learning tools and LMSs, such as Moodle, have been in existence for decades. However, there has been an accelerated use of such platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Providers responded to ensure that education was accessible via online platforms to allow lecturers to continue their daily job functions during the pandemic. This study explores these aspects from a lecturer perspective during COVID-19, using constructs from the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework and Unified Theory of Use and Acceptance of Technology (UTAUT-3) theory. This study is based on the pragmatist paradigm. This methodology was deemed appropriate as this study uses a mixed methodology for collecting and analysing qualitative and quantitative data. The objective of the study was to understand the experiences of lecturers using Moodle for e-learning in a learning journey at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution during the pandemic. The results revealed that several lecturers appeared to have adaptation challenges when using Moodle, but thereafter the system performed as expected. Overall lecturers found that Moodle promoted accessibility and performed as expected. The research further revealed that that there was insufficient training and support provided by the institution. Recommendations arising from the findings included, amongst others, upgrading internet packages and investing in backup power supplies to enhance the experience of lecturers in this learning journey. Recommendations for the institution included enhancing support and communication to lecturers especially part-time lecturers as they are not part of the formal institutional structure on a day-to-day basis.  More comprehensive training to lecturers is required to ensure lecturers are adequately equipped to improve online learning and student engagement.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i5.9490 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Moodle use in South African distance education: A UTAUT-3 – based exploration on student and lecturer perspective

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic countries all over the world underwent hard lockdowns that limited face-to-face contact in everyday aspects of our lives. Higher Education Providers responded to ensure that education was accessible via online platforms to allow students to continue their studies during the pandemic. Due to this Learning Management Systems (LMSs) were no longer merely used for uploading or downloading content and instead was used for completing online courses including submitting assignments, conducting examinations and lectures. Thus, using an LMS became the only means of survival for many educational intuitions during the pandemic. The study used the qualitative method for collecting and analyzing data by conducting one on one interviews via MS Teams. The objective of the study was to explore which functionalities of Moodle were used for e-learning in a learning journey at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution in a COVID-19 environment and why. Based on this objective, the following research question was posed: Which functionalities of Moodle do lecturers and students use when using Moodle for e-learning in a learning journey and what are the reasons for their choice? The results revealed that despite having multiple functionalities available only limited functionalities were used by both lecturers and students. It was identified that usage on Moodle was motivated by UTAUT-3 constructs such as Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Hedonic Motivation and Facilitating Conditions. The research further revealed that students and lecturers may not have understood how to use all the functionalities available hence usage was limited.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i4.8550 Crossref citations0 OpenAlex citations
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Using Moodle as a Learning Management System (LMS) for e-learning: student experiences in a developing country during the Pandemic

Raessa Jabar · Desmond Wesley Govender

International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy · 2025

Read abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of e-learning platforms globally, particularly Learning Management Systems (LMS) such as Moodle, which became essential tools for facilitating online learning in higher education. This study explores the experiences of MBA students using Moodle at a Private Distance Higher Education Institution in a developing country during the pandemic. Drawing on the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT-3), the study employed a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative data from questionnaires and qualitative data from interviews. Findings revealed that while students faced initial adaptation challenges, Moodle was perceived as a user-friendly, flexible, and cost-effective platform that facilitated their learning experience. However, students encountered significant challenges, including internet connectivity issues and power outages, which impacted their ability to engage fully with the platform. Recommendations include improving internet infrastructure, providing uninterrupted power supplies, and offering enhanced technical support to ensure seamless learning experiences. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on e-learning in developing countries, offering insights into the effectiveness of LMS platforms in distance education and highlighting areas for improvement in future e-learning implementations.

DOI 10.36096/ijbes.v7i2.7010 Crossref citations0 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 00:14 UTC · ijbescomplete · ijbes · 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC
ojs-rest21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC · ijbescomplete · ijbes · 21 Oct 2026 00:02 UTC
oai-pmh20 Oct 2026 19:49 UTC · ijbescomplete · ijbes · 20 Oct 2026 19:48 UTC
openalex-enrichment21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC · ijbescomplete · ijbes · 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC
Full import history & methodology →