This map shows the geographic impact of Dixie Sanger'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 Dixie Sanger with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dixie Sanger more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Dixie Sanger. 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 Dixie Sanger. The network helps show where Dixie Sanger may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Dixie Sanger
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Dixie Sanger.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Dixie Sanger 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 Dixie Sanger. Dixie Sanger 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.
Sanger, Dixie, et al.. (2012). Educators' Year Long Reactions to the Implementation of a Response to Intervention (RTI) Model.. 7(2). 98–107.9 indexed citations
Freeman, Nick & Dixie Sanger. (1993). Language and belief in critical thinking: emerging explanations of pictures. Bristol Research (University of Bristol). 3. 43–58.5 indexed citations
Sanger, Dixie, et al.. (1983). An Informal Reading--Language Test. ScholarWorks - WMU (Western Michigan University). 23(4). 11.2 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.