Milene Bonte

4.2k citations
55 papers · 2.5k · h-index 26

Impact in

Papers in

Milene Bonte

54 papers receiving 2.4k citations

Peers

Milene Bonte
Comparison fields: 5 of 96
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 1.8k
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 795
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology 790
  • Statistics and Probability 223
  • Sensory Systems 100
Replace Alice Mado Proverbio with:
Alice Mado Proverbio Italy
Viviane Pouthas France
Alberto Zani Italy
Jonathan Flombaum United States
Valorie N. Salimpoor Canada
Yael M. Cycowicz United States
Laura Batterink Canada
Valéria Csépe Hungary
Katarzyna Jednoróg Poland
Sabine Hunnius Netherlands
Milene Bonte relative to Alice Mado Proverbio Italy Alice Mado Proverbio's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.6×
Alice Mado Proverbio · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Milene Bonte

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Milene Bonte

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Milene Bonte, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Milene Bonte Line = papers co-authored together Milene Bonte links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 55 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2008415
2 2008289
3 2008129
4 2011117
5 2016107
6 200792
7 201386
8 201477
9 200575
10 200675
11 200472
12 201571
13 200569
14 201569
15 200960
16 201459
17 201541
18 201441
19 200340
20 201339

About Milene Bonte

Milene Bonte is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Statistics and Probability and Artificial Intelligence, having authored 55 papers that have together received 2.5k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Reading and Literacy Development (29 papers), Neuroscience and Music Perception (27 papers), Multisensory perception and integration (11 papers), Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism (9 papers), Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills (8 papers), EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces (7 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (6 papers) and Neural dynamics and brain function (6 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cognitive Neuroscience (1.8k citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (795 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (790 citations), Statistics and Probability (223 citations) and Sensory Systems (100 citations). Milene Bonte has collaborated with scholars based in Netherlands, United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Elia Formisano, Leo Blomert, Federico De Martino, Rainer Goebel, João Correia, Anita Jansen, Anne Roefs, Nicolette Siep, Remco C. Havermans and Alard Roebroeck. Their work appears in journals such as NeuroImage, Frontiers in Psychology, Journal of Neuroscience, Clinical Neurophysiology and PLoS ONE.

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