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.
Engineering Design Processes: A Comparison of Students and Expert Practitioners
2007577 citationsCynthia J. Atman, Robin Adams et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Monica Cardella
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Monica Cardella'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 Monica Cardella with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Monica Cardella more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Monica Cardella. 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 Monica Cardella. The network helps show where Monica Cardella may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Monica Cardella
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Monica Cardella.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Monica Cardella 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 Monica Cardella. Monica Cardella is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Cardella, Monica, et al.. (2020). Human-centeredness in undergraduate engineering students’ representations of engineering design. International journal of engineering education. 36(2). 600–613.1 indexed citations
Cardella, Monica, Heidi Diefes‐Dux, & Farshid Marbouti. (2016). Written feedback on design: a comparison of students and educators. International journal of engineering education. 32(3). 1481–1491.5 indexed citations
Diefes‐Dux, Heidi, et al.. (2015). Characteristics of Feedback that Influence Student Confidence and Performance during Mathematical Modeling. International journal of engineering education. 31(1). 42–57.3 indexed citations
17.
Pawley, Alice, et al.. (2013). An ecofeminist grounded analysis of sustainability in engineering education: skill set, discipline, and value. International journal of engineering education. 29(6). 1472–1489.8 indexed citations
18.
Zhang, Amy & Monica Cardella. (2010). Knowledge transmission and engineering teaching. International Conference of Learning Sciences. 1087–1094.2 indexed citations
19.
Cardella, Monica, Stephen Hoffmann, Matthew Ohland, & Alice Pawley. (2010). Sustaining sustainable design through ‘normalized sustainability’ in a first-year engineering course. International journal of engineering education. 26(2). 366–377.11 indexed citations
20.
Cardella, Monica, Cynthia J. Atman, Jennifer Turns, & Robin Adams. (2008). Students with differing design processes as freshmen: case studies on change. International journal of engineering education. 24(2). 246–259.33 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.