Kyle M. Williams

564 total citations
18 papers, 362 citations indexed

About

Kyle M. Williams is a scholar working on Education, Social Psychology and Developmental and Educational Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Kyle M. Williams has authored 18 papers receiving a total of 362 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 13 papers in Education, 4 papers in Social Psychology and 4 papers in Developmental and Educational Psychology. Recurrent topics in Kyle M. Williams's work include Online and Blended Learning (8 papers), Student Assessment and Feedback (5 papers) and Communication in Education and Healthcare (4 papers). Kyle M. Williams is often cited by papers focused on Online and Blended Learning (8 papers), Student Assessment and Feedback (5 papers) and Communication in Education and Healthcare (4 papers). Kyle M. Williams collaborates with scholars based in United States, Taiwan and United Kingdom. Kyle M. Williams's co-authors include Diane L. Schallert, Zachary Williamson, Shengjie Lin, Carlton J. Fong, Stephanie B. Corliss, Rose E Stafford, Erin D. Reilly, Jayce R. Warner, Linghui Chen and Kwangok Song and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Computers in Human Behavior and Computers & Education.

In The Last Decade

Kyle M. Williams

17 papers receiving 347 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Kyle M. Williams United States	10	220	105	96	48	44	18	362
Meryem Yılmaz Soylu United States	7	347 1.6×	78 0.7×	113 1.2×	29 0.6×	18 0.4×	17	450
Kimberly Rynearson United States	7	273 1.2×	72 0.7×	180 1.9×	22 0.5×	32 0.7×	10	392
Martijn J. M. Leenknecht Netherlands	9	287 1.3×	31 0.3×	94 1.0×	63 1.3×	40 0.9×	9	401
Ulrike-Marie Krause Germany	10	224 1.0×	34 0.3×	159 1.7×	30 0.6×	46 1.0×	27	317
You Su China	10	197 0.9×	76 0.7×	217 2.3×	40 0.8×	12 0.3×	15	340
Jianpeng Guo China	10	233 1.1×	38 0.4×	155 1.6×	36 0.8×	50 1.1×	24	390
Afsheen Rezai Iran	13	216 1.0×	59 0.6×	170 1.8×	125 2.6×	44 1.0×	42	500
Marjolein Deunk Netherlands	9	332 1.5×	26 0.2×	159 1.7×	30 0.6×	37 0.8×	30	467
Sjef Stijnen Netherlands	10	270 1.2×	43 0.4×	164 1.7×	42 0.9×	13 0.3×	18	381
Tina Benevides Canada	5	289 1.3×	82 0.8×	109 1.1×	32 0.7×	10 0.2×	5	398

Countries citing papers authored by Kyle M. Williams

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Kyle M. Williams

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Kyle M. Williams. 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 Kyle M. Williams. The network helps show where Kyle M. Williams may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Kyle M. Williams

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Kyle M. Williams. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Kyle M. Williams 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 Kyle M. Williams. Kyle M. Williams 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:

18 of 18 papers shown

Warnick, Bryan R., et al.. (2025). SAFE SPACES AND FREE SPEECH ON CAMPUS: A GUIDED TOUR OF CAMPUS CONTEXTS. Educational Theory. 76(2). 170–192.

Schallert, Diane L., et al.. (2024). Taking a stance in the process of learning: Developing perspectival understandings through knowledge co-construction during synchronous computer-mediated classroom discussion. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 19(1). 67–95. 2 indexed citations

Fong, Carlton J., et al.. (2023). Are self-compassionate writers more feedback literate? Exploring undergraduates’ perceptions of feedback constructiveness. Assessing Writing. 57. 100761–100761. 2 indexed citations

Fong, Carlton J., Diane L. Schallert, Kyle M. Williams, et al.. (2021). Making feedback constructive: the interplay of undergraduates' motivation with perceptions of feedback specificity and friendliness. Educational Psychology. 41(10). 1241–1259. 31 indexed citations

Song, Kwangok, et al.. (2021). Humor in multimodal language use: Students’ Response to a dialogic, social-networking online assignment. Linguistics and Education. 63. 100903–100903. 3 indexed citations

Williams, Kyle M., Rose E Stafford, Stephanie B. Corliss, & Erin D. Reilly. (2018). Examining student characteristics, goals, and engagement in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education. 126. 433–442. 52 indexed citations

Fong, Carlton J., Diane L. Schallert, Kyle M. Williams, et al.. (2018). When feedback signals failure but offers hope for improvement: A process model of constructive criticism. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 30. 42–53. 60 indexed citations

Fong, Carlton J., et al.. (2017). “Inside out”: Appraisals for achievement emotions from constructive, positive, and negative feedback on writing. Motivation and Emotion. 42(2). 236–257. 30 indexed citations

Song, Kwangok, et al.. (2017). Students as pinners: A multimodal analysis of a course activity involving curation on a social networking site. The Internet and Higher Education. 33. 33–40. 9 indexed citations

10.

Williams, Kyle M., et al.. (2017). Exploring Possible Selves Through Sharing Stories Online: Case Studies of Preservice Teachers in Bilingual Classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education. 69(3). 209–224. 15 indexed citations

11.

Fong, Carlton J., Jayce R. Warner, Kyle M. Williams, et al.. (2016). Deconstructing constructive criticism: The nature of academic emotions associated with constructive, positive, and negative feedback. Learning and Individual Differences. 49. 393–399. 47 indexed citations

12.

Williams, Kyle M., et al.. (2016). Small stories in online classroom discussion as resources for preservice teachers’ making sense of becoming a bilingual educator. Teaching and Teacher Education. 58. 1–16. 21 indexed citations

13.

Williams, Kyle M., et al.. (2016). “I wonder if …”. 65(1). 365–383. 3 indexed citations

14.

Svinicki, Marilla D., et al.. (2016). Factors Associated with Faculty Use of Student Data for Instructional Improvement. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 10(2). 5 indexed citations

15.

Schallert, Diane L., et al.. (2015). When students want to stand out: Discourse moves in online classroom discussion that reflect students' needs for distinctiveness. Computers in Human Behavior. 58. 1–11. 5 indexed citations

16.

Reilly, Erin D., Rose E Stafford, Kyle M. Williams, & Stephanie B. Corliss. (2014). Evaluating the validity and applicability of automated essay scoring in two massive open online courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 15(5). 39 indexed citations

17.

Williams, Kyle M., et al.. (2014). THE IMPACT OF LECTURE CAPTURE ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN ECONOMICS COURSES. 14(3). 83–92. 2 indexed citations

18.

Schallert, Diane L., Kyle M. Williams, Eunjin Seo, et al.. (2014). Does it matter if the teacher is there?: A teacher's contribution to emerging patterns of interactions in online classroom discussions. Computers & Education. 82. 315–328. 36 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