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.
Countries citing papers authored by P. David Pearson
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of P. David Pearson'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 P. David Pearson with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites P. David Pearson more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by P. David Pearson
This network shows the impact of papers produced by P. David Pearson. 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 P. David Pearson. The network helps show where P. David Pearson may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of P. David Pearson
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of P. David Pearson.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of P. David Pearson 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 P. David Pearson. P. David Pearson is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Pearson, P. David, et al.. (2013). Literacy in the disciplines. 21(1). 25.4 indexed citations
6.
Hiebert, Elfrieda H. & P. David Pearson. (2013). What Happens to the Basics. Educational leadership. 70(4). 48–53.5 indexed citations
7.
Hiebert, Elfrieda H., et al.. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología.50 indexed citations
8.
Pearson, P. David, et al.. (2010). Teaching reading in middle school : a strategic approach to teaching reading that improves comprehension and thinking.9 indexed citations
9.
Pearson, P. David. (2003). The Role of Professional Knowledge in Reading Reform.. Language Arts. 81(1). 14–15.10 indexed citations
10.
Pearson, P. David, et al.. (2003). NAEP Validity Studies: Improving the Information Value of Performance Items in Large Scale Assessments. Working Paper No. 2003-08.. National Center for Education Statistics.2 indexed citations
11.
Taylor, Barbara M., et al.. (1999). Effective Schools/Accomplished Teachers.. The Reading Teacher. 53(2).31 indexed citations
12.
Diez, Mary E., Virginia Richardson‐Koehler, & P. David Pearson. (1994). Setting standards and educating teachers : a national conversation : a report from the Wingspread conference, November 1-4, 1993.1 indexed citations
13.
Fielding, Linda G. & P. David Pearson. (1994). Reading comprehension: what works.. Educational leadership. 51(5). 62–68.73 indexed citations
14.
Pearson, P. David. (1993). Teaching and Learning Reading: A Research Perspective (Focus on Research).. Language Arts. 70(6).15 indexed citations
15.
Stallman, Anne C., et al.. (1989). Are “new” words really new?. Reading Research and Instruction. 29(2). 12–29.8 indexed citations
16.
Pearson, P. David & David Dunning. (1985). The Impact of Assessment on Reading Instruction.. 13(2). 19–29.3 indexed citations
17.
Pearson, P. David. (1985). Changing the face of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher. 38(8).112 indexed citations
Kamil, Michael L. & P. David Pearson. (1979). Theory and Practice in Teaching Reading.. 10(2). 10–16.12 indexed citations
20.
Pearson, P. David & Michael L. Kamil. (1974). Word Recognition Latencies as a Function of Form Class, Stem Length, and Affix Length.. Visible Language.2 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.