Lori McCay‐Peet

1.0k total citations
24 papers, 463 citations indexed

About

Lori McCay‐Peet is a scholar working on Information Systems, Information Systems and Management and Communication. According to data from OpenAlex, Lori McCay‐Peet has authored 24 papers receiving a total of 463 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 11 papers in Information Systems, 10 papers in Information Systems and Management and 7 papers in Communication. Recurrent topics in Lori McCay‐Peet's work include Personal Information Management and User Behavior (9 papers), Knowledge Management and Sharing (4 papers) and Information Retrieval and Search Behavior (4 papers). Lori McCay‐Peet is often cited by papers focused on Personal Information Management and User Behavior (9 papers), Knowledge Management and Sharing (4 papers) and Information Retrieval and Search Behavior (4 papers). Lori McCay‐Peet collaborates with scholars based in Canada, United Kingdom and United States. Lori McCay‐Peet's co-authors include Elaine G. Toms, E. Kevin Kelloway, Anabel Quan‐Haase, Mounia Lalmas, Vidhya Navalpakkam, Kim Martin, Heather L. O’Brien, Robert Villa, Dagmar Kern and Lisette Wilson and has published in prestigious journals such as Information Processing & Management, Journal of Information Science and Big Data & Society.

In The Last Decade

Lori McCay‐Peet

23 papers receiving 439 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Lori McCay‐Peet Canada 12 140 134 122 91 60 24 463
Simon Attfield United Kingdom 13 109 0.8× 157 1.2× 123 1.0× 77 0.8× 164 2.7× 61 638
Ying‐Hsang Liu Australia 13 97 0.7× 149 1.1× 58 0.5× 74 0.8× 35 0.6× 58 449
Iris Xie United States 13 80 0.6× 258 1.9× 99 0.8× 90 1.0× 25 0.4× 48 531
Shu Z. Schiller United States 11 155 1.1× 58 0.4× 84 0.7× 118 1.3× 23 0.4× 33 512
Hong-Ren Chen Taiwan 11 172 1.2× 141 1.1× 230 1.9× 55 0.6× 35 0.6× 41 620
Nathan W. Twyman United States 12 283 2.0× 143 1.1× 203 1.7× 42 0.5× 23 0.4× 31 652
Sandra Hirsh United States 8 108 0.8× 348 2.6× 68 0.6× 102 1.1× 20 0.3× 24 635
Matthias Trier Germany 11 177 1.3× 54 0.4× 91 0.7× 191 2.1× 32 0.5× 39 451
Jean A. Pratt United States 8 196 1.4× 99 0.7× 246 2.0× 100 1.1× 16 0.3× 20 646
Elizabeth S. Veinott United States 7 101 0.7× 43 0.3× 53 0.4× 100 1.1× 30 0.5× 24 420

Countries citing papers authored by Lori McCay‐Peet

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Lori McCay‐Peet

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Lori McCay‐Peet. 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 Lori McCay‐Peet. The network helps show where Lori McCay‐Peet may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Lori McCay‐Peet

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Chen, Yan, et al.. (2024). From theory to practice: insights and hurdles in collecting social media data for social science research. Frontiers in Big Data. 7. 1379921–1379921. 2 indexed citations
2.
Wilson, Lisette, et al.. (2021). Physician leaders’ cross-boundary use of social media: what are the implications in the current COVID-19 environment?. Leadership in health services. 34(4). 462–484. 1 indexed citations
3.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2018). Researching Serendipity in Digital Information Environments. 12 indexed citations
4.
McCay‐Peet, Lori, et al.. (2017). Serendipity in the sciences – exploring the boundaries. 49(1). 97–97. 4 indexed citations
5.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Anabel Quan‐Haase. (2016). The Influence of Features and Demographics on the Perception of Twitter as a Serendipitous Environment. 333–335. 2 indexed citations
6.
McCay‐Peet, Lori, Elaine G. Toms, & Anabel Quan‐Haase. (2016). SEADE Workshop Proposal - The Serendipity Factor. 341–343. 7 indexed citations
7.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Anabel Quan‐Haase. (2016). An Exploration of Approaches to the Support of Serendipity in Digital Environments. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI.
8.
Quan‐Haase, Anabel, Kim Martin, & Lori McCay‐Peet. (2015). Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter. Big Data & Society. 2(1). 46 indexed citations
9.
McCay‐Peet, Lori, Elaine G. Toms, & E. Kevin Kelloway. (2015). Examination of relationships among serendipity, the environment, and individual differences. Information Processing & Management. 51(4). 391–412. 59 indexed citations
10.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2015). Investigating serendipity: How it unfolds and what may influence it. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(7). 1463–1476. 83 indexed citations
11.
McCay‐Peet, Lori, Elaine G. Toms, & E. Kevin Kelloway. (2014). Development and assessment of the content validity of a scale to measure how well a digital environment facilitates serendipity. Information Research. 19. 7 indexed citations
12.
McCay‐Peet, Lori. (2014). INVESTIGATING WORK-RELATED SERENDIPITY, WHAT INFLUENCES IT,AND HOW IT MAY BE FACILITATED IN DIGITAL ENVIRONMENTS. Library and Archives Canada (Government of Canada). 10 indexed citations
13.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2013). Proposed facets of a serendipitous digital environment. 2 indexed citations
14.
Toms, Elaine G., Robert Villa, & Lori McCay‐Peet. (2013). How is a search system used in work task completion?. Journal of Information Science. 39(1). 15–25. 12 indexed citations
15.
McCay‐Peet, Lori, Mounia Lalmas, & Vidhya Navalpakkam. (2012). On saliency, affect and focused attention. 541–550. 55 indexed citations
16.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2011). Measuring the Dimensions of Serendipity in Digital Environments.. White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York). 16(3). 35 indexed citations
17.
Makri, Stephann, et al.. (2011). Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Encouraging Serendipity in Interactive Systems. 1 indexed citations
18.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2011). The serendipity quotient. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 48(1). 1–4. 16 indexed citations
19.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2010). The process of serendipity in knowledge work. 377–382. 45 indexed citations
20.
McCay‐Peet, Lori & Elaine G. Toms. (2009). Image use within the work task model: Images as information and illustration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(12). 2416–2429. 32 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

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Simon Attfield Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ying‐Hsang Liu Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Iris Xie Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Shu Z. Schiller Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Hong-Ren Chen Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Nathan W. Twyman Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sandra Hirsh Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Matthias Trier Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Jean A. Pratt Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Elizabeth S. Veinott
Rankless by CCL
2026