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.
Countries citing papers authored by Elizabeth Thoma
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Elizabeth Thoma'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 Elizabeth Thoma with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Elizabeth Thoma more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Elizabeth Thoma. 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 Elizabeth Thoma. The network helps show where Elizabeth Thoma may publish in the future.
Elizabeth Thoma is a scholar working on General Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience, having authored 23 papers that have together received 1.3k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Eating Disorders and Behaviors (1 paper), Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments (1 paper) and Psychology of Development and Education (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Developmental and Educational Psychology (309 citations), General Psychology (29 citations) and Social Psychology (261 citations). Elizabeth Thoma has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Their work appears in journals such as Acta Psychologica, Psychosomatics and American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis.
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.