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 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 04:56 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 4 | 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:46.023013+00:00 — 2026-10-22T04:56:37.792959+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 | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 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 |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 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 Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2/2 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Education is generally considered to be the core source of individuals’ better life and countries' economic and social development. Consequently, attending university and getting high qualifications are perceived as tools that generate and enhance economic growth. The current study aimed to analyse the effect of various educational levels on South African economic growth. The study employed quarterly data from 1995Q1 to 2021Q4. The autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model was employed to assess both long-run and short-run relationships among variables. The long-run results revealed that people who completed their grade 12 (with matric certificate) and bachelor's degrees contribute positively to South African economic growth. However, honours and higher degrees (master's and PhD) were found to have an inverse relationship with economic growth in South Africa. On the other hand, the short-run relationship indicated that all education levels contribute to economic growth in the short term. Based on these findings, the author suggests that the South African higher education curriculum should be revised as the negative effect of high education towards economic growth should be resulting in growing unemployment and graduates waiting to be employed rather than creating jobs themselves. Additionally, increasing job creation for graduates with higher qualifications would reduce the number of graduates that leave the country looking for employment abroad.
Labour, entrepreneurship, and technology are important components in the success of GDP Per capita, the existing workforce is not only fixated by numbers but also must be focused on quality to have a significant impact, in addition to the ability and desire of a nation to grow interested in becoming entrepreneurs. This research base on Solow and Swan's Theory said that economic growth was influenced by the growth of production factors such as population, labor, and capital accumulation, as well as the level of technological progress described in the development of knowledge. There is an element of technological progress in the Solow-Swan model which is the main differentiator from the Harrod-Domar growth model. This study used 42 observers consisting of 7 ASEAN countries, namely; Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, and Cambodia, using multiple linear regression and using classical assumption test. The research method in this study uses multiple linear regression of panel data, using the classical assumption test. To get the best model, the data will be tested for Pool Effect, Fix Effect and Random Effects Models, while the determination of the best model is based on the results of the Chow and Hausman tests. The results are shown that labor does not have a significant influence on GDP Per Capita revenue, while the entrepreneurship Index (GEI) and Technology Index (GII) variables have a positive and significant impact on GDP Per Capita revenue. The workforce hasn't affected, which is broadly described in this study because the absorption of labor has not been optimal or the provision of jobs whose proportions are not balanced with the number of the workforce.
Education is generally considered to be the core source of individuals’ better life and countries' economic and social development. Consequently, attending university and getting high qualifications are perceived as tools that generate and enhance economic growth. The current study aimed to analyse the effect of various educational levels on South African economic growth. The study employed quarterly data from 1995Q1 to 2021Q4. The autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model was employed to assess both long-run and short-run relationships among variables. The long-run results revealed that people who completed their grade 12 (with matric certificate) and bachelor's degrees contribute positively to South African economic growth. However, honours and higher degrees (master's and PhD) were found to have an inverse relationship with economic growth in South Africa. On the other hand, the short-run relationship indicated that all education levels contribute to economic growth in the short term. Based on these findings, the author suggests that the South African higher education curriculum should be revised as the negative effect of high education towards economic growth should be resulting in growing unemployment and graduates waiting to be employed rather than creating jobs themselves. Additionally, increasing job creation for graduates with higher qualifications would reduce the number of graduates that leave the country looking for employment abroad.
Labour, entrepreneurship, and technology are important components in the success of GDP Per capita, the existing workforce is not only fixated by numbers but also must be focused on quality to have a significant impact, in addition to the ability and desire of a nation to grow interested in becoming entrepreneurs. This research base on Solow and Swan's Theory said that economic growth was influenced by the growth of production factors such as population, labor, and capital accumulation, as well as the level of technological progress described in the development of knowledge. There is an element of technological progress in the Solow-Swan model which is the main differentiator from the Harrod-Domar growth model. This study used 42 observers consisting of 7 ASEAN countries, namely; Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, and Cambodia, using multiple linear regression and using classical assumption test. The research method in this study uses multiple linear regression of panel data, using the classical assumption test. To get the best model, the data will be tested for Pool Effect, Fix Effect and Random Effects Models, while the determination of the best model is based on the results of the Chow and Hausman tests. The results are shown that labor does not have a significant influence on GDP Per Capita revenue, while the entrepreneurship Index (GEI) and Technology Index (GII) variables have a positive and significant impact on GDP Per Capita revenue. The workforce hasn't affected, which is broadly described in this study because the absorption of labor has not been optimal or the provision of jobs whose proportions are not balanced with the number of the workforce.
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 |