Ashleigh Rutherford
- Cognitive Neuroscience top 10%
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology top 10%
- Psychiatry and Mental health
- Clinical Psychology
- Pharmacology
- Co-authors
- Alexis E. WhittonDiego A. PizzagalliManon L. IronsideMichael MurphyMatthew D. SacchetMiranda BeltzerJutta JoormannSamuel D. McDougle
- Topics
- Mental Health Research Topics (8 papers)Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes (6 papers)Functional Brain Connectivity Studies (6 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesAustraliaTürkiye
In The Last Decade
Ashleigh Rutherford
14 papers receiving 265 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 48
- Cognitive Neuroscience 177
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 94
- Psychiatry and Mental health 41
- Clinical Psychology 34
- Pharmacology 30
Countries citing papers authored by Ashleigh Rutherford
This map shows the geographic impact of Ashleigh Rutherford's research. 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 Ashleigh Rutherford with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ashleigh Rutherford more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Ashleigh Rutherford
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ashleigh Rutherford. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Ashleigh Rutherford. The network helps show where Ashleigh Rutherford may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ashleigh Rutherford
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ashleigh Rutherford. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ashleigh Rutherford based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Ashleigh Rutherford. Ashleigh Rutherford is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 2 | 20 | |
| 3 | 28 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 5 | 0 | |
| 6 | 12 | |
| 7 | 16 | |
| 8 | 5 | |
| 9 | 103 | |
| 10 | 5 | |
| 11 | 20 | |
| 12 | 46 | |
| 13 | 1 | |
| 14 | 1 | |
| 15 | 8 |
About Ashleigh Rutherford
Ashleigh Rutherford is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychiatry and Mental health, having authored 15 papers that have together received 268 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Mental Health Research Topics (8 papers), Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes (6 papers) and Functional Brain Connectivity Studies (6 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cognitive Neuroscience (177 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (94 citations) and Biological Psychiatry (14 citations). Ashleigh Rutherford has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Australia and Türkiye. Frequent co-authors include Alexis E. Whitton, Diego A. Pizzagalli, Manon L. Ironside, Michael Murphy, Matthew D. Sacchet, Miranda Beltzer, Jutta Joormann, Samuel D. McDougle, Michael T. Treadway and Poornima Kumar. Their work appears in journals such as Biological Psychiatry, Clinical Psychology Review and Psychological Medicine.
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.