This map shows the geographic impact of Ken Sutton'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 Ken Sutton with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ken Sutton more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ken Sutton. 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 Ken Sutton. The network helps show where Ken Sutton may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ken Sutton
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ken Sutton.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ken Sutton 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 Ken Sutton. Ken Sutton is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Sutton, Ken, Anthony Williams, Danika Tremain, & Peter W Kilgour. (2016). University entry score. Journal of Engineering Design and Technology. 14(2). 328–342.4 indexed citations
4.
Sutton, Ken & Anthony Williams. (2012). Developing a discipline-based measure of visualisation. NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia).4 indexed citations
Sutton, Ken, et al.. (2009). Spatial ability performance of female engineering students. NOVA (University of Newcastle, Australia). 170.1 indexed citations
7.
Sutton, Ken, et al.. (2009). Exploring spatial ability and mapping the performance of engineering students. NOVA (University of Newcastle, Australia). 961.4 indexed citations
Williams, Anthony, Ken Sutton, & Rebecca Allen. (2008). Spatial ability: issues associated with engineering and gender. NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia). 228.4 indexed citations
Sutton, Ken & Anthony Williams. (2007). Research outcomes supporting learning in spatial ability.3 indexed citations
12.
Tolhurst, Denise, John Hamer, Ilona Box, et al.. (2006). Do map drawing styles of novice programmers predict success in programming?: a multi-national, multi-institutional study. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 52(5). 213–222.24 indexed citations
13.
Simon, Norma P., Quintin Cutts, Sally Fincher, et al.. (2006). The ability to articulate strategy as a predictor of programming skill. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 52(5). 181–188.21 indexed citations
14.
Simon, Norma P., Sally Fincher, Anthony Robins, et al.. (2006). Predictors of success in a first programming course. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 52(5). 189–196.84 indexed citations
15.
Sutton, Ken & Anthony Williams. (2006). Impact of Spatial Ability on Students Doing Graphics Based Courses. 689.3 indexed citations
Sutton, Ken & Anthony Williams. (2006). SPATIAL COGNITION AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN. NOVA (University of Newcastle, Australia).23 indexed citations
Raadt, Michael de, Margaret Hamilton, Raymond Lister, et al.. (2005). Approaches to learning in computer programming students and their effect on success. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 28. 407–414.34 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.