Michael Fendick

432 total citations
9 papers, 329 citations indexed

About

Michael Fendick is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Epidemiology and Ophthalmology. According to data from OpenAlex, Michael Fendick has authored 9 papers receiving a total of 329 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 7 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 4 papers in Epidemiology and 3 papers in Ophthalmology. Recurrent topics in Michael Fendick's work include Visual perception and processing mechanisms (6 papers), Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies (4 papers) and Neural dynamics and brain function (2 papers). Michael Fendick is often cited by papers focused on Visual perception and processing mechanisms (6 papers), Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies (4 papers) and Neural dynamics and brain function (2 papers). Michael Fendick collaborates with scholars based in United States, Canada and United Kingdom. Michael Fendick's co-authors include Gerald Westheimer, Irène Gottlob, Robert Reinecke, J. Vernon Odom, Shijun Guo, Alina A. Zubcov, Joseph H. Calhoun, Suqin Guo, Nicholas V. Swindale and Rick Williams and has published in prestigious journals such as Vision Research, American Journal of Ophthalmology and Optometry and Vision Science.

In The Last Decade

Michael Fendick

9 papers receiving 320 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Michael Fendick United States	7	258	91	91	73	42	9	329
Jianliang Tong United States	13	286 1.1×	113 1.2×	136 1.5×	53 0.7×	42 1.0×	29	390
M.P. Headon United Kingdom	12	188 0.7×	105 1.2×	61 0.7×	169 2.3×	28 0.7×	18	325
Xiaofeng Tao United States	10	257 1.0×	108 1.2×	135 1.5×	108 1.5×	34 0.8×	17	356
Davina R. Hocking United States	9	440 1.7×	143 1.6×	121 1.3×	264 3.6×	26 0.6×	9	569
M. von Grünau Canada	5	334 1.3×	32 0.4×	53 0.6×	94 1.3×	9 0.2×	10	368
L. P. Hutman United States	8	195 0.8×	119 1.3×	89 1.0×	101 1.4×	6 0.1×	8	333
Tova Ma-Naim Israel	6	418 1.6×	190 2.1×	285 3.1×	103 1.4×	26 0.6×	8	579
D. M. Levi United States	6	460 1.8×	73 0.8×	218 2.4×	78 1.1×	18 0.4×	13	501
Pedro Faria Portugal	6	125 0.5×	79 0.9×	38 0.4×	61 0.8×	10 0.2×	9	233
Zhimo Yao China	10	217 0.8×	68 0.7×	109 1.2×	74 1.0×	18 0.4×	24	286

Countries citing papers authored by Michael Fendick

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Michael Fendick

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Michael Fendick

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

9 of 9 papers shown

1.

Swindale, Nicholas V., Michael Fendick, Stephen M. Drance, Stuart L. Graham, & Peter Hnik. (1996). Contrast Sensitivity for Flickering and Static Letters and Visual Acuity at Isoluminance in Glaucoma. Journal of Glaucoma. 5(3). 156???169–156???169. 14 indexed citations

2.

Fendick, Michael & Nicholas V. Swindale. (1994). Vernier acuity for edges defined by flicker. Vision Research. 34(20). 2717–2726. 6 indexed citations

3.

Gottlob, Irène, et al.. (1992). Visual remapping in infantile nystagmus. Vision Research. 32(6). 1115–1124. 33 indexed citations

4.

Gottlob, Irène, Michael Fendick, Shijun Guo, et al.. (1990). Visual Acuity Measurements by Swept Spatial Frequency Visual-Evoked-Cortical Potentials (VECPs): Clinical Application in Children with Various Visual Disorders. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus. 27(1). 40–47. 57 indexed citations

5.

Guo, Suqin, Robert Reinecke, Michael Fendick, & Joseph H. Calhoun. (1989). Visual Pathway Abnormalities in Albinism and Infantile Nystagmus: VECPs and Stereoacuity Measurements. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology & Strabismus. 26(2). 97–99. 29 indexed citations

6.

Baraldi, Patrizia, et al.. (1988). Measurement of Metamorphopsia in the Presence of Ocular Media Opacities. Optometry and Vision Science. 65(5). 349–353. 7 indexed citations

7.

Stein, Raymond, Elisabeth J. Cohen, Joseph H. Calhoun, Michael Fendick, & Robert Reinecke. (1987). Corneal Birth Trauma Managed with a Contact Lens. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 103(4). 596–598. 2 indexed citations

8.

Enoch, Jay M., et al.. (1985). Chapter 3 Hyperacuity: A promising means of evaluating vision through cataract. 4. 67–88. 18 indexed citations

9.

Fendick, Michael & Gerald Westheimer. (1983). Effects of practice and the separation of test targets on foveal and peripheral stereoacuity. Vision Research. 23(2). 145–150. 163 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