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 07:22 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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:54.140334+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:22:59.940111+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 | 1 | 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 |
|---|---|
| 2024 | 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 Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3/3 | 0.33 | 0 | 33.3 | 3/3 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This study explores the complex interplay of dispositional and situational factors in the context of workplace bullying among police officers in South Africa, with relevance to the broader understanding of bullying behavior. Both dispositional and situational factors have been recognized as significant contributors to workplace stress and demands, particularly evident during challenging times such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Even professions known for their demanding work environments, such as law enforcement, have not been immune to these pressures. The research conducted a quantitative analysis, surveying 208 employees of the South African Police Services. The study incorporated self-administered questionnaires, employing statistical methods like correlation, ANOVA, and multiple regression analysis. This multifaceted approach assessed the relationships between workplace bullying, situational factors, dispositional factors, and demographics (including gender, age, qualifications, and years of service). The study’s findings highlighted a substantial and positive link between dispositional characteristics and workplace bullying, similarly, noting a favorable association between situational conditions and bullying. Consequently, the research underscores the importance of considering both dispositional and situational factors in comprehending workplace bullying among police officers. This South African study offers valuable insights by bridging a significant knowledge gap on workplace bullying among law enforcement personnel. It emphasizes the relevance of examining the interplay between dispositional and situational factors in understanding and addressing workplace bullying in diverse contexts.
This study employed a conceptual framework to elucidate the issue of incivility. The researcher created a cohesive conceptual framework to facilitate the construction of knowledge and to offer a rational elucidation of the knowledge acquired during this study. This will provide a framework for a deeper comprehension of incivility in professional nursing education in South Africa. A qualitative exploratory descriptive methodology was employed. The research was conducted in a nursing college in partnership with a university of technology and a university-affiliated nursing school. A selected sample of fifteen (15) students and ten (10) nurse educators was utilised for data collection. Semi-structured, in-person interviews were used to gather data until saturation was achieved with 23 participants. Participation was voluntary, and discussions were kept confidential. Distinct themes arose from the data analysis and were interpreted through interpersonal relations theory. The related notions were delineated as Part 1 – the leaves of the tree: manifestations of incivility, Part 2 – the trunk of the tree: incivility itself, and Part 3 – the roots of the tree: the origins of incivility within the framework of incivility.
This qualitative study delves into the perspectives of psychiatric nurses in South Africa regarding safety enhancements in forensic units. Working in forensic units is linked to safety concerns due to frequent incidences of interpersonal violence and the nature of patients admitted to such units. As such, the need to explore measures to address safety concerns arose. In-depth interviews and reflexive thematic analysis revealed a consensus among nurses on the importance of various interventions, including improving security measures, enhancing the physical environment, fostering collaboration among staff members, increasing staffing levels, and garnering support from management. Notably, support from management emerges as a crucial factor in facilitating open discussions and sustained engagement in safety improvement initiatives. The study underscores the pivotal role of management support in realizing safer forensic units. The findings offer valuable insights applicable to forensic units in psychiatric settings globally, where safety concerns for both personnel and patients persist.
This study employed a conceptual framework to elucidate the issue of incivility. The researcher created a cohesive conceptual framework to facilitate the construction of knowledge and to offer a rational elucidation of the knowledge acquired during this study. This will provide a framework for a deeper comprehension of incivility in professional nursing education in South Africa. A qualitative exploratory descriptive methodology was employed. The research was conducted in a nursing college in partnership with a university of technology and a university-affiliated nursing school. A selected sample of fifteen (15) students and ten (10) nurse educators was utilised for data collection. Semi-structured, in-person interviews were used to gather data until saturation was achieved with 23 participants. Participation was voluntary, and discussions were kept confidential. Distinct themes arose from the data analysis and were interpreted through interpersonal relations theory. The related notions were delineated as Part 1 – the leaves of the tree: manifestations of incivility, Part 2 – the trunk of the tree: incivility itself, and Part 3 – the roots of the tree: the origins of incivility within the framework of incivility.
This qualitative study delves into the perspectives of psychiatric nurses in South Africa regarding safety enhancements in forensic units. Working in forensic units is linked to safety concerns due to frequent incidences of interpersonal violence and the nature of patients admitted to such units. As such, the need to explore measures to address safety concerns arose. In-depth interviews and reflexive thematic analysis revealed a consensus among nurses on the importance of various interventions, including improving security measures, enhancing the physical environment, fostering collaboration among staff members, increasing staffing levels, and garnering support from management. Notably, support from management emerges as a crucial factor in facilitating open discussions and sustained engagement in safety improvement initiatives. The study underscores the pivotal role of management support in realizing safer forensic units. The findings offer valuable insights applicable to forensic units in psychiatric settings globally, where safety concerns for both personnel and patients persist.
This study explores the complex interplay of dispositional and situational factors in the context of workplace bullying among police officers in South Africa, with relevance to the broader understanding of bullying behavior. Both dispositional and situational factors have been recognized as significant contributors to workplace stress and demands, particularly evident during challenging times such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Even professions known for their demanding work environments, such as law enforcement, have not been immune to these pressures. The research conducted a quantitative analysis, surveying 208 employees of the South African Police Services. The study incorporated self-administered questionnaires, employing statistical methods like correlation, ANOVA, and multiple regression analysis. This multifaceted approach assessed the relationships between workplace bullying, situational factors, dispositional factors, and demographics (including gender, age, qualifications, and years of service). The study’s findings highlighted a substantial and positive link between dispositional characteristics and workplace bullying, similarly, noting a favorable association between situational conditions and bullying. Consequently, the research underscores the importance of considering both dispositional and situational factors in comprehending workplace bullying among police officers. This South African study offers valuable insights by bridging a significant knowledge gap on workplace bullying among law enforcement personnel. It emphasizes the relevance of examining the interplay between dispositional and situational factors in understanding and addressing workplace bullying in diverse contexts.
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 |