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.
Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools
2014244 citationsSanna Järvelä, Paul A. Kirschner et al.Educational Technology Research and Developmentprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Jos Jaspers'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 Jos Jaspers with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jos Jaspers more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jos Jaspers. 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 Jos Jaspers. The network helps show where Jos Jaspers may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jos Jaspers
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jos Jaspers.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jos Jaspers 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 Jos Jaspers. Jos Jaspers is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Järvelä, Sanna, Paul A. Kirschner, Ernesto Panadero, et al.. (2014). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development. 63(1). 125–142.244 indexed citations breakdown →
3.
Panadero, Ernesto, Sanna Järvelä, Jonna Malmberg, et al.. (2013). Enhancing socially shared regulation in working groups using a CSCL regulation tools.. Figshare.4 indexed citations
Janssen, Jeroen, Gijsbert Erkens, Jos Jaspers, & Gellof Kanselaar. (2006). Visualizing participation to facilitate argumentation. Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University).11 indexed citations
9.
Weinberger, Armin, Douglas B. Clark, Gijsbert Erkens, et al.. (2006). Argumentative knowledge construction in CSCL. Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University). 1094–1100.6 indexed citations
10.
Janssen, Jeroen, et al.. (2006). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during online collaborative learning. Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University).4 indexed citations
11.
Janssen, Jeroen, et al.. (2005). Effects of visualizing participation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).3 indexed citations
Kanselaar, Gellof, et al.. (2003). Projectonderwijs in ICT-leeromgeving in de tweede fase vo. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS).
15.
Erkens, Gijsbert, et al.. (2002). 'W8ff:-)' Chattalk in een coöperatieve leeromgeving. Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University). 3(2). 24–33.1 indexed citations
16.
Kanselaar, Gellof, et al.. (2002). Co-construction of knowledge in computer supported collaborative argumentation (CSCA). Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University). 93–130.7 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.