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 Erik Hollnagel
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Erik Hollnagel'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 Erik Hollnagel with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Erik Hollnagel more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Erik Hollnagel. 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 Erik Hollnagel. The network helps show where Erik Hollnagel may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Erik Hollnagel
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Erik Hollnagel.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Erik Hollnagel 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 Erik Hollnagel. Erik Hollnagel 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.
Hollnagel, Erik, et al.. (2019). The imperfections of accident analysis. 2–6.1 indexed citations
2.
Hollnagel, Erik, et al.. (2019). RECOGNITION AND ANALYSIS OF HUMAN FACTORS AND NON-TECHNICAL SKILLS USING THE FUNCTIONAL RESONANCE ANALYSIS METHOD - FRAM. KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology). 1(1).2 indexed citations
Hollnagel, Erik. (2014). Is justice really important for safety. University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark). 18. 10–13.3 indexed citations
6.
Hollnagel, Erik, et al.. (2010). Proposing safety performance indicators for helicopter offshore on the Norwegian Continental Shelf. HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe).10 indexed citations
7.
Besnard, Denis, et al.. (2010). Essays on socio-technical vulnerabilities and strategies of control in Integrated Operations. Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo).3 indexed citations
8.
Nemeth, Christopher, Erik Hollnagel, & Sidney Dekker. (2009). Preparation and restoration. Ashgate eBooks.23 indexed citations
Hollnagel, Erik. (2005). HUMAN RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT IN CONTEXT. Nuclear Engineering and Technology. 37(2). 159–166.65 indexed citations
12.
Hollnagel, Erik, et al.. (1999). The collaboration between operators and procedures: a cognitive systems engineering approach to performance improvement. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 1211–1215.2 indexed citations
13.
Hollnagel, Erik. (1999). Keep Cool: The Value of Affective Computer Interfaces in a Rational World. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 676–680.9 indexed citations
14.
Hollnagel, Erik. (1997). Designing for complexity. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. 217–220.5 indexed citations
Hollnagel, Erik. (1993). "Critiquing Human Error: A Knowledge-Based Human-Computer Collaboration Approach, " by B. G. Silverman (Book Review).. 39. 521–528.1 indexed citations
Hollnagel, Erik. (1988). Cognitive models, cognitive tasks, and information retrieval. 34–52.3 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.