Natasja Schutter

10 papers receiving 310 citations

Peers

Natasja Schutter
Comparison fields: 5 of 63
  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology 44
  • Health 191
  • Behavioral Neuroscience 25
  • Biological Psychiatry 11
  • Social Psychology 89
Replace Julie Lutz with:
Julie Lutz United States
Kaisla Komulainen Finland
Ralitsa Stoykova France
Eunjin Lee Tracy United States
Xueyang Zhao China
Carlos Vara‐García Spain
Zhibin Jiao Australia
Diego De Leo Italy
Rosemary Kingston Australia
Áine Ní Mhaoláin Ireland
Natasja Schutter relative to Julie Lutz United States Julie Lutz's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.1×
Julie Lutz · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Natasja Schutter

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Natasja Schutter

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 21 scholars most cited alongside Natasja Schutter, 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 Natasja Schutter Line = papers co-authored together Natasja Schutter links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

10 of 10 papers shown
#Work
1 2016106
2 201780
3 201730
4 202228
5 201926
6 201722
7 20209
8
[Intestinal pseudo-obstruction during use of baclofen].
19957
9 20213
10 20212

About Natasja Schutter

Natasja Schutter is a scholar working on Health, Social Psychology, General Health Professions, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology, having authored 10 papers that have together received 313 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Health disparities and outcomes (8 papers), Mental Health Research Topics (3 papers), Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction (3 papers), Employment and Welfare Studies (2 papers), Aging and Gerontology Research (2 papers), Bipolar Disorder and Treatment (1 paper), Therapeutic Uses of Natural Elements (1 paper) and Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology (44 citations), Health (191 citations), Behavioral Neuroscience (25 citations), Biological Psychiatry (11 citations) and Social Psychology (89 citations). Natasja Schutter has collaborated with scholars based in Netherlands and Belgium. Frequent co-authors include Max L. Stek, Tjalling J. Holwerda, Hannie C. Comijs, Jack Dekker, T.G. van Tilburg, Rien Van, Aartjan T.F. Beekman, Dorly J. H. Deeg, Robert A. Schoevers and Richard C. Oude Voshaar. Their work appears in journals such as International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, European Journal of Ageing, Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences, Journal of Psychosomatic Research and Aging & Mental Health.

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