Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams is a research paper published in Administrative Science Quarterly (1999). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 1.4. It has been cited 10,272 times.
Scored on demand from live citation data
Linked data & code
DataRank reads this dataset's downstream impact straight off the citation graph — no black box, no proprietary weighting. How is this computed?
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
We only score data papers we can read in full — never from an abstract alone.
Base Score Contribution
1.4
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0
Citation network not refreshed for this result
This paper's DataRank is currently driven only by its base citation score. Citation network data was not refreshed for this result.
Learn more about DataRank methodology →Influential Citations
1163
Fields of Study
Luminous Minds: The Highly Sensitive Person - Rejection Sensitivity
Luminous Minds: The Highly Sensitive Person - Rejection Sensitivity
Luminous Minds: The Highly Sensitive Person - Rejection Sensitivity
Additional file 1 of Co-designing implementation strategies for the WALK-Cph intervention in Denmark aimed at increasing mobility in acutely hospitalized older patients: a qualitative analysis of selected strategies and their justifications
Additional file 1 of Co-designing implementation strategies for the WALK-Cph intervention in Denmark aimed at increasing mobility in acutely hospitalized older patients: a qualitative analysis of selected strategies and their justifications
Additional file 1 of Registered nurses’ experiences of communication with patients when practising person–centred care over the phone: a qualitative interview study
Additional file 1 of Registered nurses’ experiences of communication with patients when practising person–centred care over the phone: a qualitative interview study
Additional file 1 of Contextual factors favouring success in the accreditation process in Colombian hospitals: a nationwide observational study
Additional file 1 of Contextual factors favouring success in the accreditation process in Colombian hospitals: a nationwide observational study
Additional file 2 of Contextual factors favouring success in the accreditation process in Colombian hospitals: a nationwide observational study
Additional file 2 of Contextual factors favouring success in the accreditation process in Colombian hospitals: a nationwide observational study
Additional file 1 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 1 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 2 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 2 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 3 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 3 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 4 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 4 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing
Additional file 5 of “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing