Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
A study of novice teachers: Challenges and supports in the first years
2009334 citationsDouglas McDougall et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Douglas McDougall
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Douglas McDougall'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 Douglas McDougall with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Douglas McDougall more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Douglas McDougall
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Douglas McDougall. 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 Douglas McDougall. The network helps show where Douglas McDougall may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Douglas McDougall
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Douglas McDougall.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Douglas McDougall 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 Douglas McDougall. Douglas McDougall is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
McDougall, Douglas. (2024). A History of Mathematics Technology Changes. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education. 24(3-4). 281–282.2 indexed citations
3.
McDougall, Douglas. (2023). Integrating Theory and Practice. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education. 23(2). 175–176.1 indexed citations
McDougall, Douglas, et al.. (2020). CJSMTE: 20 Years Strong. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education. 20(4). 784–791.1 indexed citations
Stoilescu, Dorian & Douglas McDougall. (2011). Gender Digital Divide and Challenges in Undergraduate Computer Science Programs.. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation. 34(1). 308–333.24 indexed citations
10.
Stoilescu, Dorian & Douglas McDougall. (2010). Case Studies of Teachers Integrating Computer Technology in Mathematics. EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. 2010(1). 2944–2952.5 indexed citations
McDougall, Douglas, et al.. (2009). Process-Oriented Assessment in Mathematics Education. E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. 2009(1). 426–429.2 indexed citations
McDougall, Douglas, et al.. (2008). E-contests in Mathematics: Technological Challenges versus Technological Innovations. EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. 2008(1). 6331–6336.2 indexed citations
17.
McDougall, Douglas, et al.. (2005). Cultural Factors Affecting Chinese Students' Participation in Asynchronous Online Learning. E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. 2005(1). 2723–2729.16 indexed citations
Kitchen, David & Douglas McDougall. (1999). Collaborative Learning on the Internet. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 27(3). 245–258.80 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.