Chris Tyler

479 total citations
10 papers, 85 citations indexed

About

Chris Tyler is a scholar working on Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science and Management Science and Operations Research. According to data from OpenAlex, Chris Tyler has authored 10 papers receiving a total of 85 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 4 papers in Political Science and International Relations, 2 papers in Sociology and Political Science and 2 papers in Management Science and Operations Research. Recurrent topics in Chris Tyler's work include Policy Transfer and Learning (3 papers), International Environmental Law and Policies (1 paper) and Delphi Technique in Research (1 paper). Chris Tyler is often cited by papers focused on Policy Transfer and Learning (3 papers), International Environmental Law and Policies (1 paper) and Delphi Technique in Research (1 paper). Chris Tyler collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and India. Chris Tyler's co-authors include David Christian Rose, Karen Akerlof, Jason J. Blackstock, Carla-Leanne Washbourne, David Budtz Pedersen, Josh A. Goldstein, William J. Sutherland and Thomas Webler and has published in prestigious journals such as Nature, Policy Sciences and Science and Public Policy.

In The Last Decade

Chris Tyler

9 papers receiving 80 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Chris Tyler United Kingdom	6	31	25	17	16	15	10	85
Mirjan Oude Vrielink Netherlands	5	20 0.6×	36 1.4×	15 0.9×	12 0.8×	31 2.1×	31	99
Andrea Liverani United States	5	31 1.0×	70 2.8×	11 0.6×	21 1.3×	12 0.8×	9	127
David M. Cameron Canada	5	43 1.4×	16 0.6×	16 0.9×	9 0.6×	10 0.7×	23	114
Alexander Ruser Germany	7	26 0.8×	46 1.8×	15 0.9×	2 0.1×	5 0.3×	17	81
Ludvig Norman Sweden	8	108 3.5×	72 2.9×	5 0.3×	4 0.3×	3 0.2×	16	152
Michael W. Dowdle Singapore	5	58 1.9×	58 2.3×	6 0.4×	3 0.2×	11 0.7×	16	119
Juan Carlos Cortázar Velarde Venezuela	4	24 0.8×	16 0.6×	2 0.1×	5 0.3×	16 1.1×	8	59
Urs Luterbacher Switzerland	7	44 1.4×	39 1.6×	9 0.5×	7 0.4×	4 0.3×	18	123
Deen K. Chatterjee United States	4	23 0.7×	30 1.2×	6 0.4×	2 0.1×	1 0.1×	12	72
Konstantinos Chatzis France	8	43 1.4×	50 2.0×	6 0.4×	1 0.1×	3 0.2×	50	171

Countries citing papers authored by Chris Tyler

Since Specialization

Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Chris Tyler'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 Chris Tyler with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Chris Tyler more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Chris Tyler

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Chris Tyler. 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 Chris Tyler. The network helps show where Chris Tyler may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Chris Tyler

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Chris Tyler. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Chris Tyler 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 Chris Tyler. Chris Tyler is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

10 of 10 papers shown

1.

Tyler, Chris. (2024). Why we need a body to oversee how science is used by governments. Nature. 635(8039). 545–546.

2.

Tyler, Chris, et al.. (2023). AI tools as science policy advisers? The potential and the pitfalls. Nature. 622(7981). 27–30. 12 indexed citations

3.

Akerlof, Karen, et al.. (2022). Global perspectives on scientists’ roles in legislative policymaking. Policy Sciences. 55(2). 351–367. 2 indexed citations

4.

Tyler, Chris. (2020). Legislative Science Advice in Europe and the United Kingdom: Lessons for the United States. UCL Discovery (University College London). 1 indexed citations

5.

Akerlof, Karen, et al.. (2020). New Methods in Creating Transdisciplinary Science Policy Research Agendas: The Case of Legislative Science Advice. Science and Public Policy. 47(4). 536–547. 3 indexed citations

6.

Rose, David Christian, et al.. (2020). Improving the use of evidence in legislatures: the case of the UK Parliament. Evidence & Policy. 16(4). 619–638. 17 indexed citations

7.

Tyler, Chris & Karen Akerlof. (2019). Three secrets of survival in science advice. Nature. 566(7743). 175–177. 7 indexed citations

8.

Tyler, Chris. (2017). Wanted: academics wise to the needs of government. Nature. 552(7683). 7–7. 17 indexed citations

9.

Rose, David Christian, et al.. (2017). The Role of Research in the UK Parliament. UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia). 12 indexed citations

10.

Washbourne, Carla-Leanne, et al.. (2017). Legislative science advice in Europe: the case for international comparative research. Palgrave Communications. 3(1). 14 indexed citations

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact