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.
Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Published Research
20061.7k citationsRobin K. Henson, J. Kyle RobertsEducational and Psychological Measurementprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by J. Kyle Roberts
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of J. Kyle Roberts'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 J. Kyle Roberts with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites J. Kyle Roberts more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by J. Kyle Roberts. 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 J. Kyle Roberts. The network helps show where J. Kyle Roberts may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of J. Kyle Roberts
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of J. Kyle Roberts.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of J. Kyle Roberts 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 J. Kyle Roberts. J. Kyle Roberts is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Heflin, Houston, Meredith M. Platt, & J. Kyle Roberts. (2014). Training and Teaching Methods of Volunteer Teachers. Christian Education Journal Research on Educational Ministry. 11(1). 24–32.2 indexed citations
4.
Tsoflias, Georgios P., et al.. (2010). Field and Laboratory GPR Monitoring of Biological Activity in Saturated Porous Media. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts. 6415.1 indexed citations
Henson, Robin K. & J. Kyle Roberts. (2006). Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Published Research. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 66(3). 393–416.1730 indexed citations breakdown →
Roberts, J. Kyle & Xitao Fan. (2004). Bootstrapping within the Multilevel/Hierarchical Linear Modeling Framework: A Primer for Use with SAS and SPLUS.22 indexed citations
Moreno, Nancy, et al.. (2001). Teaming Up with Scientists.. Science and Children. 39(1). 42–45.7 indexed citations
14.
Henson, Robin K. & J. Kyle Roberts. (2001). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Preservice Teachers' Responses to the Attitudes and Beliefs on Classroom Control Inventory..1 indexed citations
15.
Roberts, J. Kyle & Robin K. Henson. (2001). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of a New Measure of Teacher Efficacy: Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale..18 indexed citations
Roberts, J. Kyle & Robin K. Henson. (2000). Self-Efficacy Teaching and Knowledge Instrument for Science Teachers (SETAKIST): A Proposal for a New Efficacy Instrument..21 indexed citations
18.
Roberts, J. Kyle. (2000). The Pitfalls of Ignoring Multilevel Design in National Datasets..3 indexed citations
19.
Roberts, J. Kyle. (2000). Nested ANOVA vs. Crossed ANOVA: When and How To Use Which..1 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.