Danaë Stanton Fraser

5.3k total citations
115 papers, 3.1k citations indexed

About

Danaë Stanton Fraser is a scholar working on Human-Computer Interaction, Information Systems and Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. According to data from OpenAlex, Danaë Stanton Fraser has authored 115 papers receiving a total of 3.1k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 47 papers in Human-Computer Interaction, 26 papers in Information Systems and 25 papers in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Recurrent topics in Danaë Stanton Fraser's work include Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts (23 papers), Mobile Learning in Education (20 papers) and Spatial Cognition and Navigation (18 papers). Danaë Stanton Fraser is often cited by papers focused on Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts (23 papers), Mobile Learning in Education (20 papers) and Spatial Cognition and Navigation (18 papers). Danaë Stanton Fraser collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Romania. Danaë Stanton Fraser's co-authors include David Kirk, Nigel Foreman, Sara Price, Yvonne Rogers, Helen Neale, Paul N. Wilson, Claire O’Malley, Cliff Randell, Mark Weal and Geraldine Fitzpatrick and has published in prestigious journals such as Scientific Reports, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Communications of the ACM.

In The Last Decade

Danaë Stanton Fraser

111 papers receiving 2.7k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Danaë Stanton Fraser United Kingdom 29 1.2k 791 643 579 478 115 3.1k
Alissa N. Antle Canada 31 1.9k 1.6× 442 0.6× 557 0.9× 554 1.0× 711 1.5× 163 3.3k
Luca Chittaro Italy 42 1.8k 1.5× 395 0.5× 1.4k 2.2× 599 1.0× 275 0.6× 166 5.0k
Francesco Bellotti Italy 28 655 0.6× 369 0.5× 648 1.0× 1.8k 3.2× 423 0.9× 144 3.8k
Silvia Wen‐Yu Lee Taiwan 16 994 0.8× 761 1.0× 1.3k 2.0× 863 1.5× 1.3k 2.7× 27 3.5k
Massimo Zancanaro Italy 30 736 0.6× 274 0.3× 659 1.0× 301 0.5× 393 0.8× 144 2.7k
Constantine Stephanidis Greece 26 1.3k 1.1× 388 0.5× 755 1.2× 238 0.4× 136 0.3× 300 3.4k
Panos Markopoulos Netherlands 32 1.6k 1.4× 440 0.6× 450 0.7× 478 0.8× 667 1.4× 251 4.2k
Halszka Jarodzka Netherlands 32 1.7k 1.4× 263 0.3× 807 1.3× 1.0k 1.8× 1.0k 2.2× 90 5.4k
Michela Ott Italy 20 765 0.6× 364 0.5× 506 0.8× 1.3k 2.3× 633 1.3× 68 2.8k
Tim A. Majchrzak Germany 16 1.4k 1.1× 699 0.9× 623 1.0× 457 0.8× 281 0.6× 88 2.6k

Countries citing papers authored by Danaë Stanton Fraser

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Danaë Stanton Fraser

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Danaë Stanton Fraser. 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 Danaë Stanton Fraser. The network helps show where Danaë Stanton Fraser may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Danaë Stanton Fraser

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Lukosch, Heide, Mohamed Khamis, Victoria Sánchez, et al.. (2025). Shaping the future: principles for policy recommendations for responsible innovation in virtual worlds. Frontiers in Virtual Reality. 6.
2.
Maras, Katie, et al.. (2025). Mock Juror Perceptions of a Young Defendant With Developmental Language Disorder: A Mixed‐Methods Study. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. 60(4). e70060–e70060.
3.
Levordashka, Ana, et al.. (2024). From story to heartbeats: Physiological synchrony in theater audiences.. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts. 2 indexed citations
4.
Smith, Laura G. E., et al.. (2024). “I just embodied you”: Psychological Ownership of Personalized Photorealistic Avatars. 1–7. 1 indexed citations
5.
Fraser, Danaë Stanton, et al.. (2024). Shaping The Future: Developing Principles for Policy Recommendations for Responsible Innovation in Virtual Worlds. Pure (University of Bath). 1–6. 3 indexed citations
6.
Fraser, Danaë Stanton, et al.. (2024). How Changes in the Mean Latency, Jitter Amplitude, and Jitter Frequency Impact Target Acquisition Performance. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception. 22(2). 1–18. 1 indexed citations
7.
Levordashka, Ana, et al.. (2023). An Exploration of Theatre Rehearsals in Social Virtual Reality. Pure (University of Bath). 1–7. 1 indexed citations
8.
Voinescu, Alexandra, Karin Petrini, & Danaë Stanton Fraser. (2023). Presence and simulator sickness predict the usability of a virtual reality attention task. Virtual Reality. 27(3). 1967–1983. 10 indexed citations
9.
10.
Green, David Philip, et al.. (2020). ‘You wouldn’t get that from watching TV!’: Exploring audience responses to virtual reality non-fiction in the home. Convergence The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies. 27(3). 805–829. 17 indexed citations
11.
Barnett, Julie, et al.. (2020). Slums of hope: Sanitising silences within township tour reviews. Geoforum. 110. 87–96. 11 indexed citations
12.
Farmer, Harry, et al.. (2020). Did you see what I saw?: Comparing attentional synchrony during 360° video viewing in head mounted display and tablets.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied. 27(2). 324–337. 2 indexed citations
13.
Bremner, Paul, Niki Trigoni, Hatice Güneş, et al.. (2013). Being there: humans and robots in public spaces. The University of Bath Online Publications Store (The University of Bath). 581–582. 1 indexed citations
14.
Luckin, Rosemary, Chee‐Kit Looi, Sadhana Puntambekar, et al.. (2011). Contextualizing the changing face of Scaffolding Research: Are we driving pedagogical theory development or avoiding it?. UCL Discovery (University College London). 5 indexed citations
15.
Fraser, Danaë Stanton, et al.. (2006). eScience, Science Education and Technology Integration in the Classroom: Some Practical Considerations. 138–138. 4 indexed citations
16.
Rogers, Yvonne, Sara Price, G. Fitzpatrick, et al.. (2004). Designing New Forms of Digital Augmentation for Learning Outdoors. Explore Bristol Research. 1–9. 14 indexed citations
17.
Price, Sara, Yvonne Rogers, Danaë Stanton Fraser, & Hilary Smith. (2003). A New Conceptual Framework for CSCL: Supporting Diverse Forms of Reflection through Multiple Interactions. IOE EPrints. 41 indexed citations
18.
Fraser, Danaë Stanton, et al.. (2003). Situating Historical Events through Mixed Reality: Adult-Child Interactions in the Storytent. Bristol Research (University of Bristol). 293–302. 7 indexed citations
19.
Price, Sara, Yvonne Rogers, Mike Scaife, Danaë Stanton Fraser, & Helen Neale. (2002). Using tangibles to support new ways of playing and learning. UCL Discovery (University College London). 4 indexed citations
20.
Ashkenazi, V., et al.. (1997). Real-Time Autonomous Orbit Determination of LEO Satellites using GPS. 755–761. 2 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

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Alissa N. Antle Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Luca Chittaro Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Francesco Bellotti Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Silvia Wen‐Yu Lee Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Massimo Zancanaro Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Constantine Stephanidis Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Panos Markopoulos Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Halszka Jarodzka Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Michela Ott Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Tim A. Majchrzak
Rankless by CCL
2026