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.
Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics
2010709 citationsSharon J. Derry, Roy Pea et al.Journal of the Learning Sciencesprofile →
Transformation and School Success: The Politics and Culture of Educational Achievement
Countries citing papers authored by Frederick Erickson
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Frederick Erickson'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 Frederick Erickson with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Frederick Erickson more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Frederick Erickson
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Frederick Erickson. 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 Frederick Erickson. The network helps show where Frederick Erickson may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Frederick Erickson
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Frederick Erickson.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Frederick Erickson 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 Frederick Erickson. Frederick Erickson is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Derry, Sharon J., Roy Pea, Brigid Barron, et al.. (2010). Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 19(1). 3–53.709 indexed citations breakdown →
Erickson, Frederick. (2007). Some Thoughts on “Proximal” Formative Assessment of Student Learning. Teachers College Record The Voice of Scholarship in Education. 109(13). 186–216.30 indexed citations
7.
Erickson, Frederick. (2004). Talk and social theory : ecologies of speaking and listening in everyday life.285 indexed citations
Erickson, Frederick & Kris D. Gutiérrez. (2002). Culture, Rigor, and Science in Educational Research.. Educational Researcher. 31(8). 21–24.116 indexed citations
10.
Hicks, Deborah, Frederick Erickson, Mary Catherine O’Connor, et al.. (1996). Discourse, Learning, and Schooling. Cambridge University Press eBooks.250 indexed citations
11.
Erickson, Frederick. (1995). Where the Action is: On Collaborative Action Research in Education. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education.8 indexed citations
Erickson, Frederick. (1989). Learning and Collaboration in Teaching (Research Currents).. Language Arts. 66(4).2 indexed citations
14.
Erickson, Frederick. (1988). Discourse Coherence, Participation Structure, and Personal Display in a Family Dinner Table Conversation. ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania).5 indexed citations
Erickson, Frederick & Jeffrey Shultz. (1982). The counselor as gatekeeper : social interaction in interviews. Academic Press eBooks.309 indexed citations
Erickson, Frederick. (1975). Gatekeeping and the Melting Pot.. Harvard Educational Review.17 indexed citations
20.
Erickson, Frederick, et al.. (1971). Ecology and Education: An Open System Model for Urban Independent Schools.. Journal of research and development in education.
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.