Erik Schils

806 citations
10 papers · 386 · h-index 7

Impact in

Papers in

Erik Schils

10 papers receiving 295 citations

Peers

Erik Schils
Comparison fields: 5 of 36
  • Linguistics and Language 157
  • Language and Linguistics 223
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 182
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology 143
  • Literature and Literary Theory 72
Replace Mark Patkowski with:
Mark Patkowski United States
Georgette Ioup United States
Robert M. Vago United States
Ruth Johnson United States
Theo van
Grace Wiebe Canada
Sascha W. Felix Germany
Leiv Egil Breivik Norway
Jeffrey Steele Canada
Amanda Huensch United States
Erik Schils relative to Mark Patkowski United States Mark Patkowski's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Mark Patkowski · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Erik Schils

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Erik Schils'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 Schils with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Erik Schils more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Erik Schils

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Erik Schils. 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 Schils. The network helps show where Erik Schils may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 8 scholars most cited alongside Erik Schils, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Erik Schils Line = papers co-authored together Erik Schils links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

10 of 10 papers shown
#Work
1 1997259
2 198955
3 198926
4 198613
5 199511
6 19977
7 19916
8 19936
9 19962
10 19881

About Erik Schils

Erik Schils is a scholar working on Language and Linguistics, Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics and Language, Literature and Literary Theory and Developmental and Educational Psychology, having authored 10 papers that have together received 386 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Natural Language Processing Techniques (4 papers), EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning (3 papers), Second Language Learning and Teaching (2 papers), Phonetics and Phonology Research (2 papers), Discourse Analysis in Language Studies (1 paper), Lexicography and Language Studies (1 paper), Reading and Literacy Development (1 paper) and Multilingual Education and Policy (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Linguistics and Language (157 citations), Language and Linguistics (223 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (182 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (143 citations) and Literature and Literary Theory (72 citations). Erik Schils has collaborated with scholars based in Netherlands. Frequent co-authors include Theo Bongaerts, Brigitte Planken, Nanda Poulisse, Bert Weltens, Flor Aarts, John W.M. Jagt, Kees de Bot and Eric Kellerman. Their work appears in journals such as Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Language Learning, Language Testing, IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching and Literary and Linguistic Computing.

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact