Kate Crookes

1.4k total citations
33 papers, 1.0k citations indexed

About

Kate Crookes is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. According to data from OpenAlex, Kate Crookes has authored 33 papers receiving a total of 1.0k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 26 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 16 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and 11 papers in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Recurrent topics in Kate Crookes's work include Face Recognition and Perception (26 papers), Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior (14 papers) and Face recognition and analysis (8 papers). Kate Crookes is often cited by papers focused on Face Recognition and Perception (26 papers), Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior (14 papers) and Face recognition and analysis (8 papers). Kate Crookes collaborates with scholars based in Australia, Hong Kong and New Zealand. Kate Crookes's co-authors include Elinor McKone, William G. Hayward, Gillian Rhodes, Linda Jeffery, Daniel D. Dilks, Lulu Wan, Katherine J. Reynolds, Amy Dawel, Simone Favelle and Rachel A. Robbins and has published in prestigious journals such as PLoS ONE, Scientific Reports and Cognition.

In The Last Decade

Kate Crookes

32 papers receiving 993 citations

Peers

Kate Crookes

ECP

CVPR

SPS

Stefan R. Schweinberger Germany

Jürgen M. Kaufmann Germany

Jessica Irons Australia

Kim M. Curby United States

I Bülthoff Germany

Moqian Tian China

Gizelle Anzures United States

Naiqi G. Xiao Canada

Peter De Graef Belgium

Tirta Susilo United States

Stefan R. Schweinberger Germany

Kate Crookes

752 ×0.8

421 ×0.8

ECP

169 ×0.5

CVPR

129 ×1.1

38 ×0.5

SPS

Citations per year, relative to Kate Crookes Kate Crookes (= 1×) peers Stefan R. Schweinberger

Countries citing papers authored by Kate Crookes

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Kate Crookes

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Kate Crookes

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Kate Crookes. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Kate Crookes 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 Kate Crookes. Kate Crookes is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

20 of 20 papers shown

Saunders, Rosemary, Kate Crookes, Karla Seaman, et al.. (2023). Frailty and pain in an acute private hospital: an observational point prevalence study. Scientific Reports. 13(1). 3345–3345. 2 indexed citations

Saunders, Rosemary, Kate Crookes, Karla Seaman, et al.. (2022). Effectiveness of nurse-led volunteer support and technology-driven pain assessment in improving the outcomes of hospitalised older adults: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 12(6). e059388–e059388. 2 indexed citations

Crookes, Kate, et al.. (2022). Nurses’ perceptions of using volunteer support in health care settings: A systematic scoping review. International Nursing Review. 70(3). 405–414. 2 indexed citations

Saunders, Rosemary, Kate Crookes, Mustafa Atee, et al.. (2021). Prevalence of frailty and pain in hospitalised adult patients in an acute hospital: a protocol for a point prevalence observational study. BMJ Open. 11(3). e046138–e046138. 3 indexed citations

Bell, Jason, David C. Burr, Kate Crookes, & Maria Concetta Morrone. (2020). Perceptual Oscillations in Gender Classification of Faces, Contingent on Stimulus History. iScience. 23(10). 101573–101573. 11 indexed citations

Kloth, Nadine, et al.. (2017). A new other-race effect for gaze perception.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance. 43(11). 1857–1863. 14 indexed citations

Crookes, Kate, et al.. (2017). Hidden Markov model analysis reveals the advantage of analytic eye movement patterns in face recognition across cultures. Cognition. 169. 102–117. 60 indexed citations

Crookes, Kate & Gillian Rhodes. (2017). Poor recognition of other-race faces cannot always be explained by a lack of effort. Visual Cognition. 25(4-6). 430–441. 16 indexed citations

Wan, Lulu, Kate Crookes, Amy Dawel, et al.. (2016). Face-blind for other-race faces: Individual differences in other-race recognition impairments.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 146(1). 102–122. 36 indexed citations

10.

Crookes, Kate, et al.. (2015). How Well Do Computer-Generated Faces Tap Face Expertise?. PLoS ONE. 10(11). e0141353–e0141353. 70 indexed citations

11.

Wan, Lulu, Kate Crookes, Katherine J. Reynolds, Jessica Irons, & Elinor McKone. (2015). A cultural setting where the other-race effect on face recognition has no social–motivational component and derives entirely from lifetime perceptual experience. Cognition. 144. 91–115. 67 indexed citations

12.

Crookes, Kate, et al.. (2014). Caucasian and Asian eye movement patterns in face recognition: A computational exploration using hidden Markov models. Journal of Vision. 14(10). 1212–1212. 3 indexed citations

13.

Crookes, Kate & Rachel A. Robbins. (2014). No childhood development of viewpoint-invariant face recognition: Evidence from 8-year-olds and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 126. 103–111. 12 indexed citations

14.

Hayward, William G., et al.. (2013). Eye movements for scrambled faces. Journal of Vision. 13(9). 398–398. 2 indexed citations

15.

Crookes, Kate, Simone Favelle, & William G. Hayward. (2013). Holistic Processing for Other-Race Faces in Chinese Participants Occurs for Upright but Not Inverted Faces. Frontiers in Psychology. 4. 29–29. 29 indexed citations

16.

McKone, Elinor, Kate Crookes, Linda Jeffery, & Daniel D. Dilks. (2012). A critical review of the development of face recognition: Experience is less important than previously believed. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 29(1-2). 174–212. 162 indexed citations

17.

Crookes, Kate & William G. Hayward. (2012). Face inversion disproportionately disrupts sensitivity to vertical over horizontal changes in eye position.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance. 38(6). 1428–1437. 11 indexed citations

18.

Jeffery, Linda, Gillian Rhodes, Elinor McKone, et al.. (2011). Distinguishing norm-based from exemplar-based coding of identity in children: Evidence from face identity aftereffects.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance. 37(6). 1824–1840. 37 indexed citations

19.

Susilo, Tirta, Kate Crookes, Elinor McKone, & Hannah Turner. (2009). The Composite Task Reveals Stronger Holistic Processing in Children than Adults for Child Faces. PLoS ONE. 4(7). e6460–e6460. 29 indexed citations

20.

Crookes, Kate & Elinor McKone. (2009). Early maturity of face recognition: No childhood development of holistic processing, novel face encoding, or face-space. Cognition. 111(2). 219–247. 193 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact