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 — 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | All selected publications | 3 | 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): 2026-10-21T07:22:47.413204+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:22:48.083404+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 | 2 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 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 |
|---|---|
| 2023 | 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 | 1 | 3 | 2/2 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This paper aims to determine the effect of professional skepticism, auditor experience and auditor competence on fraud detection. The population of this research is auditors who work at Public Accounting Firms (KAP) in Central and South Jakarta. This paper used purposive sampling technique and obtained 60 questionnaires from auditors as respondents. This paper is using quantitative research and the data are analyzed using Multiple Linear Regression Analysis with significance level of 5% (0.05). The results of this paper showed that professional skepticism and auditor competence had a significant and positive effect on fraud detection. Meanwhile, the experience of the auditor has no effect on fraud detection.
This study aims to reveal the practice of internal control over financial reporting (PIPK) at the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia in 2019-2021. This research is a type of qualitative research using an interpretive perspective with an ethnomethodological method. The data in this study are primary and secondary data and data collection techniques using observation, interviews, and documentation. Informants in this study were seven informants. The selection of this informant was based on capacity in the practice of internal control over financial reporting (PIPK) at the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The results of the study stated that (1) Internal Control over the Financial Reporting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia is still not optimal because the understanding of SPIP in general and PIPK in particular is not sufficient, (2) The role of the second line of management at the Supreme Court has not run adequately because it is still ad-hoc so that it is not well organized, and (3) the Assessment of Internal Control over the Financial Reporting of the Supreme Court has not been carried out in a systematic and structured so that it has not been able to fully support the achievement of the objectives of implementing the PIPK, namely to provide adequate assurance that the Financial Statements are prepared with the implementation of adequate internal controls.
This study aims to reveal the practice of internal control over financial reporting (PIPK) at the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia in 2019-2021. This research is a type of qualitative research using an interpretive perspective with an ethnomethodological method. The data in this study are primary and secondary data and data collection techniques using observation, interviews, and documentation. Informants in this study were seven informants. The selection of this informant was based on capacity in the practice of internal control over financial reporting (PIPK) at the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The results of the study stated that (1) Internal Control over the Financial Reporting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia is still not optimal because the understanding of SPIP in general and PIPK in particular is not sufficient, (2) The role of the second line of management at the Supreme Court has not run adequately because it is still ad-hoc so that it is not well organized, and (3) the Assessment of Internal Control over the Financial Reporting of the Supreme Court has not been carried out in a systematic and structured so that it has not been able to fully support the achievement of the objectives of implementing the PIPK, namely to provide adequate assurance that the Financial Statements are prepared with the implementation of adequate internal controls.
This paper aims to determine the effect of professional skepticism, auditor experience and auditor competence on fraud detection. The population of this research is auditors who work at Public Accounting Firms (KAP) in Central and South Jakarta. This paper used purposive sampling technique and obtained 60 questionnaires from auditors as respondents. This paper is using quantitative research and the data are analyzed using Multiple Linear Regression Analysis with significance level of 5% (0.05). The results of this paper showed that professional skepticism and auditor competence had a significant and positive effect on fraud detection. Meanwhile, the experience of the auditor has no effect on fraud detection.
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 |