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.
Tumour `budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer
This map shows the geographic impact of John Murphy'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 John Murphy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites John Murphy more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by John Murphy. 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 John Murphy. The network helps show where John Murphy may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of John Murphy
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of John Murphy.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of John Murphy 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 John Murphy. John Murphy is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Burris, Carol Corbett & John Murphy. (2014). Yes, Everyone Can Be College Ready.. Educational leadership. 71(4). 62–66.
3.
Murphy, John, et al.. (2012). Mentored Learning in Special Collections: Undergraduate Archival and Rare Books Internships. 3(2). 50–62.5 indexed citations
4.
Burris, Carol Corbett, Kevin G. Welner, Edward W. Wiley, & John Murphy. (2007). A World-Class Curriculum for All.. Educational leadership. 64(7). 53–56.7 indexed citations
Murphy, John, et al.. (2004). Location, Location, Location: Challenges of Outsourced Usability Evaluation. VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet). 12–15.2 indexed citations
9.
Willers, M., et al.. (2002). An AC-DC converter with low input distortion and near unity power factor. European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications. 1–7.8 indexed citations
10.
Carroll, Jennie, Steve Howard, Jane Peck, & John Murphy. (2002). A Field Study of Perceptions and Use of Mobile Telephones by 16 to 22 Year Olds. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 4(2). 6.113 indexed citations
Murphy, John. (1995). Critical Rhetoric as Political Discourse. 32(1). 1–15.13 indexed citations
15.
Murphy, John. (1993). An ESL Oral Communication Lesson: One Teacher's Techniques and Principles. Basic communication course annual. 5(1). 11.1 indexed citations
Murphy, John. (1987). 'Like Outlaws': Australian Narratives from the Vietnam War. Meanjin. 46(2). 153.1 indexed citations
18.
Murphy, John. (1987). The Listening Strategies of English as a Second Language College Students.. Research in the Teaching of Developmental Education. 4(1). 27–46.20 indexed citations
19.
Murphy, John. (1985). An Investigation into the Listening Strategies of ESL College Students.. UMI eBooks.42 indexed citations
20.
Murphy, John. (1975). The dark angel: gothic elements in Shelley's works.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.