Citations per year, relative to Eileen Scanlon Eileen Scanlon (= 1×)
peers
Martin Oliver
Countries citing papers authored by Eileen Scanlon
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Eileen Scanlon'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 Eileen Scanlon with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Eileen Scanlon more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Eileen Scanlon. 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 Eileen Scanlon. The network helps show where Eileen Scanlon may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Eileen Scanlon
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Eileen Scanlon.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Eileen Scanlon 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 Eileen Scanlon. Eileen Scanlon is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Herodotou, Christothea, et al.. (2020). Interdisciplinary Research in Technology-Enhanced Learning: Strategies for Effective Working.. Open Research Online (The Open University).1 indexed citations
Scanlon, Eileen, William A. Woods, & Doug Clow. (2014). Informal Participation in Science in the UK: Identification, Location and Mobility with iSpot. Educational Technology & Society. 17(2). 58–71.19 indexed citations
9.
Cox, Richard J., Diana Laurillard, Rose Luckin, et al.. (2012). System Upgrade: Realising the Vision for UK Education. UCL Discovery (University College London).4 indexed citations
10.
Pearce, Nick, et al.. (2010). Digital Scholarship Considered: How New Technologies Could Transform Academic Work. Durham Research Online (Durham University).43 indexed citations
McAndrew, Patrick, Eileen Scanlon, & Doug Clow. (2010). An Open Future for Higher Education. Open Research Online (The Open University). 33(1).30 indexed citations
13.
Holliman, Richard, et al.. (2009). Investigating science communication in the information age : implications for public engagement and popular media. Information Sciences.101 indexed citations
14.
Leach, Joan, Simeon Yates, & Eileen Scanlon. (2008). Models of science communication. Information Sciences. 128–146.7 indexed citations
15.
Conole, Gráìnne, Eileen Scanlon, Lucinda Kerawalla, et al.. (2008). From design to narrative: the development of inquiry-based learning models.. Open Research Online (The Open University). 2008(1). 2065–2074.3 indexed citations
Jones, Ann, Eileen Scanlon, & Canan Blake. (2000). Conferencing in communities of learners: examples from social history and science communication. Educational Technology & Society. 3.18 indexed citations
18.
Scanlon, Eileen, et al.. (2000). Evaluating information and communication technologies for learning. Educational Technology & Society. 3.26 indexed citations
19.
Scanlon, Eileen. (1996). Residuals and influence in regression.. Insurance Mathematics and Economics. 3(18). 228.38 indexed citations
20.
Smith, Randall B., Tim O’Shea, Claire O’Malley, Eileen Scanlon, & Josie Taylor. (1990). Preliminary experiments with a distributed, multi-media, problem solving environment. OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique). 31–48.60 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.