Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Concepts, Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions: Changing Perspectives in Science Education
This map shows the geographic impact of Mike Watts'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 Mike Watts with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mike Watts more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mike Watts. 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 Mike Watts. The network helps show where Mike Watts may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mike Watts
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mike Watts.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mike Watts 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 Mike Watts. Mike Watts is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Watts, Mike, et al.. (2020). Becoming Scientific: Developing Science across the Life-Course. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).5 indexed citations
Watts, Mike, et al.. (2005). Communicating In School Science. Directory of Open access Books (OAPEN Foundation).2 indexed citations
10.
Watts, Mike, et al.. (2000). Variable product purity and functional capacity after CD34+cell selection: A comparison of the CliniMACS and Isolex 300i clinical scale devices.. UCL Discovery (University College London).2 indexed citations
11.
Ahmed, Faheem, et al.. (2000). Poor viability of freshly apheresed PBSC harvests: Implications for overnight storage before cryopreservation or additional manipulative procedures.. UCL Discovery (University College London).1 indexed citations
Alsop, Steve, et al.. (1998). Pupils' Perceptions of Radiation and Radioactivity: The Wary Meet the Unsavoury.. School science review. 79(289). 75–79.8 indexed citations
Watts, Mike, et al.. (1997). Questions of Understanding: Categorising Pupils' Questions in Science.. School science review. 79(286). 57–63.69 indexed citations
16.
Watts, Mike, et al.. (1996). A comparison of ESHAP+G-CSF vs cyclophosphamide 1.5g/m(2)+G-CSF for PBSC mobilisation in pre-treated lymphoma patients: A matched pair analysis.. UCL Discovery (University College London).1 indexed citations
17.
Khwaja, Asim, et al.. (1993). CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PARAMETERS USED FOR MONITORING PERIPHERAL-BLOOD STEM-CELL (PBSC) HARVESTING. UCL Discovery (University College London).1 indexed citations
18.
Watts, Mike & Alan C. West. (1992). Progress through Problems, Not Recipes for Disaster.. School science review. 73(265). 57–64.7 indexed citations
19.
Watts, Mike, et al.. (1989). Learning and teaching in school science : practical alternatives. Open University Press eBooks.25 indexed citations
20.
Watts, Mike, et al.. (1988). Down the Tubes--Viewers' Opinions of Science Education Television in the Classroom.. School science review. 69(248).1 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.