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: 3 / 3 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 07:23 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 02:09 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.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 selected publications.
3 / 3 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
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): 2026-10-21T07:23:09.631720+00:00 — 2026-10-22T02:09:56.900441+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 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 |
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 ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 3 |
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 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This study explored the bank-specific and macroeconomic factors influencing capital adequacy in South African commercial banks. In this research, a balanced panel data set comprising 11 recapitalized banks was employed, spanning the period from 2008 to 2019. Employing panel regression techniques including OLS, Fixed Effects, Random Effects, and the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM), the analysis examines the influence of profitability (ROA), bank size, leverage, broad money supply, and the central bank’s monetary policy rate on the Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR). The results indicate that profitability, bank size, leverage, and the broad money supply are critical determinants of capital sufficiency. Banks with increased profitability and increased exposure to the money supply typically demonstrate more robust capital positions. Larger bank size and increased leverage levels negatively affect capital adequacy ratios. The little impact of the delayed CAR signifies minimal persistence in capital buffer methods over time, implying that banks may not significantly depend on prior year capital conditions in their current capital planning. The study highlights the complex nature of capital sufficiency, influenced by microeconomic factors such as size and leverage, as well as macroeconomic indices like the money supply. The findings substantiate the Capital Buffer Theory and furnish critical insights for regulators, bank executives, and policymakers seeking to bolster the resilience of the banking industry in South Africa.
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a global economic crisis that significantly impacted the South African banking sector, already weakened by a pre-existing recession. While bank profitability and credit quality declined, stock market reactions appeared less severe, indicating a potential disconnect between fundamentals and investor behaviour. This study explores the influence of investor sentiment on credit risk, lending, and performance (ROA) of selected JSE-listed banks during the pandemic, incorporating behavioural finance perspectives. Panel regression analysis reveals that COVID-19 had a significant negative effect on stock, ROA and ROE, driven by heightened uncertainty and rising non-performing loans. Liquidity and capital positively influenced returns and ROE, reflecting investor confidence in resilient banks. Investor sentiment had a weakly positive impact on returns, but a significant negative effect on both ROA and ROE, suggesting that excessive optimism may have led to riskier lending practices and reduced profitability. Larger banks underperformed in terms of returns, likely due to operational complexity during the crisis. These findings highlight the critical role of behavioural factors in shaping financial outcomes during systemic shocks and provide new insights into emerging market banking dynamics under crisis conditions.
This study examined the effect of deposit diversification on the financial performance of Deposit-Taking Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (DT-SACCOs) in Kenya and evaluated the moderating effect of corporate governance on this relationship. The study adopted a positivist research philosophy and a causal research design. The target population comprised 176 SASRA-licensed DT-SACCOs in Kenya, from which 122 SACCOs with complete financial records for the period 2015–2024 were selected using simple random sampling. Panel data techniques, including fixed-effects and random-effects regression models, were employed to estimate the direct and moderating effects, while hierarchical regression was used to test the moderation hypothesis. The findings revealed that non-withdrawable deposits significantly and positively influenced both surplus and dividend payout after introducing lags, whereas withdrawable deposits had no significant effect on financial performance. The results further established that corporate governance had a positive and significant direct effect on financial performance and significantly strengthened the relationship between deposit diversification and financial performance. The findings provide practical guidance for DT-SACCO managers and policymakers to strengthen stable deposit mobilization and corporate governance as mechanisms for enhancing financial sustainability and institutional performance.
This study examined the effect of deposit diversification on the financial performance of Deposit-Taking Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (DT-SACCOs) in Kenya and evaluated the moderating effect of corporate governance on this relationship. The study adopted a positivist research philosophy and a causal research design. The target population comprised 176 SASRA-licensed DT-SACCOs in Kenya, from which 122 SACCOs with complete financial records for the period 2015–2024 were selected using simple random sampling. Panel data techniques, including fixed-effects and random-effects regression models, were employed to estimate the direct and moderating effects, while hierarchical regression was used to test the moderation hypothesis. The findings revealed that non-withdrawable deposits significantly and positively influenced both surplus and dividend payout after introducing lags, whereas withdrawable deposits had no significant effect on financial performance. The results further established that corporate governance had a positive and significant direct effect on financial performance and significantly strengthened the relationship between deposit diversification and financial performance. The findings provide practical guidance for DT-SACCO managers and policymakers to strengthen stable deposit mobilization and corporate governance as mechanisms for enhancing financial sustainability and institutional performance.
This study explored the bank-specific and macroeconomic factors influencing capital adequacy in South African commercial banks. In this research, a balanced panel data set comprising 11 recapitalized banks was employed, spanning the period from 2008 to 2019. Employing panel regression techniques including OLS, Fixed Effects, Random Effects, and the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM), the analysis examines the influence of profitability (ROA), bank size, leverage, broad money supply, and the central bank’s monetary policy rate on the Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR). The results indicate that profitability, bank size, leverage, and the broad money supply are critical determinants of capital sufficiency. Banks with increased profitability and increased exposure to the money supply typically demonstrate more robust capital positions. Larger bank size and increased leverage levels negatively affect capital adequacy ratios. The little impact of the delayed CAR signifies minimal persistence in capital buffer methods over time, implying that banks may not significantly depend on prior year capital conditions in their current capital planning. The study highlights the complex nature of capital sufficiency, influenced by microeconomic factors such as size and leverage, as well as macroeconomic indices like the money supply. The findings substantiate the Capital Buffer Theory and furnish critical insights for regulators, bank executives, and policymakers seeking to bolster the resilience of the banking industry in South Africa.
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a global economic crisis that significantly impacted the South African banking sector, already weakened by a pre-existing recession. While bank profitability and credit quality declined, stock market reactions appeared less severe, indicating a potential disconnect between fundamentals and investor behaviour. This study explores the influence of investor sentiment on credit risk, lending, and performance (ROA) of selected JSE-listed banks during the pandemic, incorporating behavioural finance perspectives. Panel regression analysis reveals that COVID-19 had a significant negative effect on stock, ROA and ROE, driven by heightened uncertainty and rising non-performing loans. Liquidity and capital positively influenced returns and ROE, reflecting investor confidence in resilient banks. Investor sentiment had a weakly positive impact on returns, but a significant negative effect on both ROA and ROE, suggesting that excessive optimism may have led to riskier lending practices and reduced profitability. Larger banks underperformed in terms of returns, likely due to operational complexity during the crisis. These findings highlight the critical role of behavioural factors in shaping financial outcomes during systemic shocks and provide new insights into emerging market banking dynamics under crisis conditions.
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 |