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.
Top 5 in the selected collection · Ranked by Crossref lifetime citations. Only articles with at least one known citation are included; source totals are never combined.
2024 · Rejaul Karim · Md. Mahmud Hasan · Abdul Waaje
2016 · Kwangsoo Lim
2023 · Mateus Habili · Oltiana Muharremi · Meleq Hoxhaj
2016 · Ihsan Isik · Larissa Kyj · Ihsan Kulali
2020 · Rodney D. Boehme · Veljko Fotak · Anthony May
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: 40 / 45 publications (88.9%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 00:21 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: 22 Oct 2026 00:44 UTC — 29 Oct 2026 06:43 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.
45 / 45 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 45 selected publications.
45 / 45 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 45 selected publications.
45 / 45 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 45 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 7 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 5 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 3/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 0/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 4 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 10 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 3 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 5 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 12 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 3/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | — | 4 | 0/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | All selected publications | 3 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 15 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 35 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 11 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 5 | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 14 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 3/4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 0/4 | 4/4 |
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 45 / 45 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): 2026-10-22T00:44:41.011102+00:00 — 2026-10-29T06:43:50.865269+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 | 2 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 2 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 6 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 6 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 6 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 10 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 14 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 19 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 12 | 45 | 45/45 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 8 | 45 | 45/45 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2014 | 1 |
| 2015 | 2 |
| 2016 | 6 |
| 2019 | 7 |
| 2020 | 3 |
| 2021 | 3 |
| 2022 | 5 |
| 2023 | 6 |
| 2024 | 4 |
| 2025 | 4 |
| 2026 | 4 |
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 Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 45 | 41 | 92 | 45/45 | 1.02 | 0.0 | 47.5 | 40/45 · 88.9% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This paper aims to examine the financial performance of Bangladeshi listed commercial banks. The study analyzed the financial performances of banks categorized into three generations—first, second, and third—based on their year of commencement of operations in the country. The data of a total of 24 banks, 8 from each generation, listed in the Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE), has been collected from audited financial statements for the time period of 13 years, from 2010 to 2022. Data has been analyzed using different ratios of profitability, liquidity, capital adequacy, operational efficiency, and credit risk. The ANOVA test also has been used to make a comparison of profitability—the return on assets (ROA), and return on equity (ROE) of the banks of different generations. According to the results, the average profitability ratios in terms of ROA, and ROE of the second-generation banks showed their credibility than banks of other generations; while first generation banks kept higher liquidity, and capital adequacy with higher credit risk than the banks of other generations. The first-generation banks also showed a lower cost-expense ratio, and a higher efficiency in terms of operation, than the banks in the second and third generations. The research also discovered that the profitability of banks of different generations significantly varies from one another.
This paper investigates how firms shifted their dividend policies and leverage policies in response to the economic shock caused by the 2008 financial crisis. The sample countries are United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Japan, China, and Korea. The empirical relationship of firms’ dividend policies with their capital structures and earnings was likely to undergo a major change around the 2008 financial crisis, as firms adjusted their capital structures and dividend policies in response to the extreme credit crunch caused by the financial crisis. The extent and the speed that firms deleverage themselves and reduce their dividends were likely to be influenced by countries’ cultural and social norms. This paper finds a significant reduction in dividends across sample countries except Great Britain and France after the 2008 crisis. This finding supports the free cash flow theory that dividends are paid to dissipate free cash flow to address agency conflicts between managers and shareholders. This paper finds a higher correlation between dividends and leverages before the 2008 crisis, and that it strengthened after the crisis except Great Britain and Korea. This finding is consistent more with the pecking order theory than with the trade-off theory of leverage.
Examining the reasons why Albanians use internet banking services is the focus of this paper. Due to recent technological developments, Albania's banking industry is utilizing technology for an increasing number of banking procedures. We started by presenting some of the key elements that have been identified as having a significant impact on the literature regarding the adoption of online banking, including demographic, socioeconomic, and other elements based on the technology adoption model (TAM). For our empirical research, we used primary data that was collected through surveys that various bank customers in Albania completed. The decreased desire to utilize cash appears to be a key element influencing the rise in the usage of online banking applications and services. Other important factors are the application technical issues and reduction of banking operations time as well as the application security level. The findings of this study will help banks better understand their customers' needs and will provide them with suggestions on how to make technology development plans easier.
By drawing on Ukrainian experience, this paper analyzes the anatomy of bank efficiency in a transitional economy. Acknowledging the vast disparities in the business technology of different size banks, in this comprehensive study, we innovatively estimate group-specific (distinct) frontiers for small, medium, and large size banks. The results from separate frontiers reveal that Ukrainian banks record 38% technical inefficiency, 26% pure technical inefficiency, and 17% scale inefficiency on average. Apparently, banks in transition waste about the two fifths of their factor inputs during the production of financial services. The cardinal source of sub-performance in transitional banks seems to be managerial inefficiencies. We also found that banks operating in areas with more political influence and more developed infrastructure outperform the banks operating in politically and economically weaker regions. The results also indicate that larger banks, enjoying public trust in a risky business climate, dominate smaller banks in all forms of efficiency. However, such bias for size causes large banks to suffer from decreasing returns to scale and small banks from idle capacity. Consequently, the policies promoting consolidation between small and large banks may alleviate the excess (idle) capacity for large (small) banks in a transitional economy.
Using a large sample of U.S. firms during 1987–2011, we find robust evidence that the issuance of seasoned equity is associated with abnormally high future stock price crash risk. The association between seasoned equity offerings and crash risk is stronger among offerings that involve the sale of secondary shares (existing shares sold by insiders or large blockholders). We also find that recent seasoned equity issuers are far less likely to experience sudden positive price jumps relative to firms that have not recently issued equity. Our findings of elevated crash risk and diminished jump risk, when taken together, are consistent with a heightened propensity for firms to hoard bad news but not good news when issuing equity.
Maintaining adequate liquidity while preserving profitability remains a central challenge for commercial banks because liquid assets strengthen resilience but typically generate lower returns than loans and other earning assets. This study investigates the effect of liquidity on the profitability of U.S. commercial banks using 8,000 quarterly bank observations for 2010–2024. Profitability is measured by return on assets (ROA), with return on equity (ROE) used for robustness, while liquidity, capital adequacy, the loan-to-asset ratio, and bank size are modeled as explanatory variables. Pooled OLS, fixed-effects, and random-effects estimators are compared, and diagnostic tests support a two-way fixed-effects model with standard errors clustered by bank and quarter. The preferred estimates show that a one-percentage-point increase in the liquidity ratio reduces annualized ROA by 0.0183 percentage points (SE = 0.0031; p < 0.001). A one-standard-deviation rise in liquidity, equal to 5.52 percentage points, lowers ROA by approximately 0.101 percentage points, representing 9.2% of the sample mean ROA of 1.097%. Capital adequacy increases ROA by 0.0530 percentage points, and the loan-to-asset ratio increases it by 0.0148 percentage points, both at p < 0.001, whereas bank size is insignificant (β = 0.1008; p = 0.352). The ROE robustness model also yields a negative liquidity coefficient of −0.1074 (p < 0.001). The findings confirm a measurable liquidity–profitability trade-off and support risk-sensitive liquidity regulation that protects financial stability without encouraging persistently excessive holdings of low-yield liquid assets.
This paper examines how uninsured deposits influence credit union funding and whether private excess deposit insurance alters the stability, pricing, and lending capacity of uninsured deposits — deposits that exceed the federal deposit insurance limit. Using U.S. credit union Call Report data from 1995–2022, we exploit variation across institution size, insurance regime, and participation in optional private excess deposit insurance. We distinguish between pre-crisis (1995–2007) and post-crisis (2009–2022) periods surrounding the 2008 expansion of federal insurance limits. We document pronounced heterogeneity across the size distribution. For small credit unions, uninsured deposits are limited in scale and are associated with lower loan intensity. In contrast, uninsured deposits play a central funding role for large credit unions, which account for 94% of industry assets and 97% of uninsured deposits. For these institutions, uninsured deposits support lending and command higher funding costs — effects that are significantly moderated by excess deposit insurance, reducing funding costs by approximately 27 basis points during the pre-crisis period. Following 2008, excess insurance participation declines among large institutions but increases modestly among small firms. Overall, excess deposit insurance functions as a partial substitute for federal coverage, stabilizing uninsured funding without increasing delinquency rates — evidence against moral hazard.
This study examines how first-generation immigrants in the United States plan for retirement, report income, and engage with the Social Security system. The analysis combines an original anonymous survey of 120 first-generation immigrants with descriptive, correlational, and illustrative aggregate evidence constructed from Social Security Administration, Census Bureau, and related institutional data for 2013–2023. The survey results show three consistent patterns. First, retirement knowledge is limited: most respondents do not understand how Social Security benefits are calculated, yet a large majority would attend retirement-planning workshops. Second, financial behavior is shaped by legal status and labor-market formality. Tax filing rates are high overall, but underreporting incentives are stronger among respondents paid in cash and among groups facing legal or administrative uncertainty. Third, family obligations materially affect long-term planning. Many respondents prioritize supporting relatives over retirement savings, and women report lower earnings despite comparable English proficiency and, in this sample, higher educational attainment. Over 2013–2023, Social Security program income and program cost rose alongside the immigrant population, but this aggregate exercise is illustrative only, is not causal, and cannot identify immigrants’ net fiscal impact on the system. The paper’s main contribution is therefore behavioral: it shows how limited knowledge, payment formality, and family obligations shape retirement planning within a non-representative regional sample of first-generation immigrants.
We study the sinking fund provision in 1,533 nonconvertible corporate bonds issued from 1980 to 1996 with the year 1996 being the last year of inclusion for these provisions in fixed coupon non-convertible corporate bonds. The period 1980 to 1996 is classified as the period of high interest rates (Tewari, Byrd, and Ramanlal, 2015). We find that the provision addresses agency issues due to reinvestment risk, credit improvement, and growth options. When the interest rates are high, investment grade issues with sinking fund have longer maturities (> 20 years) by a ratio exceeding 4:1, while non-sinking fund issues have shorter maturities (≤ 20 years) by a ratio of about 2:1. High yield issues with sinking fund experience credit risk improvement, while non-sinking fund issues experience credit risk deterioration. When the rates are low and expected to rise, the provision is likely to present accumulation threat to the firm thereby, deterrent to its use by the firms. Also, firms use the sinking fund as a call option to capture the benefits of growth. These results suggest that the sinking fund provision has the potential to make a comeback in the corporate debt in a high-interest rate environment and when the rates are likely to fall. The current environment of persistent high rates presents conditions ripe for inclusion of the sinking fund provision in the corporate bonds.
Using a large sample of bond rating downgrades of US firms announced by the three largest rating agencies during 1997-2023, I find that cumulative abnormal stock returns (CAR) spanning the day of and day following downgrade announcements are significantly and negatively related to annual report readability, indicating that downgrades are more informative among firms with more readable annual reports. My baseline regression results indicate that a one standard deviation improvement in annual report readability corresponds to a reduction in the announcement CAR of approximately forty-three basis points, which is economically meaningful given that it constitutes roughly 27% of the sample average announcement CAR of -1.62%. Furthermore, additional analysis reveals that the informativeness enhancing effect that better annual report readability has on rating downgrades is stronger among firms that should be more difficult to monitor and evaluate, including lower rated firms, firms with high stock return volatility, and younger firms. Overall, the results strongly support the hypothesis that well-written annual reports facilitate more timely and informative bond rating downgrades, especially among more informationally problematic firms.
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 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 00:22 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 21 Oct 2026 00:21 UTC |