Software Process Improvement and Practice

7.5k citations
354 papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

  • Software top 5%
    • Software Reliability and Analysis Research
    • Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
    • Software Engineering Research
    • Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services

Papers in

Software Process Improvement and Practice

332 papers receiving 6.7k citations

Peers

Software Process Improvement and Practice
Comparison fields: 5 of 109
  • Software 1.2k
  • Information Systems 5.8k
  • Computer Science Applications 1.4k
  • Management Information Systems 2.3k
  • Communication 527
Replace Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice with:
Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice United States
Journal of Database Management United States
Computer Science Review India
Information Technology and Management United States
Journal of Information Technology Education Research United States
Information Systems and e-Business Management United States
ACM Transactions on the Web United States
Journal of Web Semantics Germany
ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems United States
International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems United States
Software Process Improvement and Practice relative to Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice United States Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.6×
Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Software Process Improvement and Practice

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Software Process Improvement and Practice. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Software Process Improvement and Practice more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice.

About Software Process Improvement and Practice

The 354 papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice in the last decades have received a total of 7.5k indexed citations . Papers published in Software Process Improvement and Practice usually cover Management Information Systems (141 papers), Software (60 papers), Information Systems (302 papers), Computer Science Applications (38 papers) and Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality (31 papers) specifically the topics of Software Engineering Techniques and Practices (249 papers), Software Engineering Research (161 papers), Business Process Modeling and Analysis (99 papers), Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies (77 papers), Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services (50 papers), Software Reliability and Analysis Research (46 papers), Open Source Software Innovations (37 papers) and Outsourcing and Supply Chain Management (26 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Software Process Improvement and Practice are Ulrich W. Eisenecker, Krzysztof Czarnecki, Simon Helsen, Daniel M. Germán, Ita Richardson, Dirk Stelzer, Werner Mellis, Darja Šmite, David Wilson and David Raffo.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact