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.
Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations
20061.3k citationsMarcel V. J. Veenman, B.H.A.M. van Hout‐Wolters et al.Metacognition and Learningprofile →
Verbal Protocols of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading
1996760 citationsPeter Afflerbach et al.College Composition and Communicationprofile →
Verbal Protocols of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading
Countries citing papers authored by Peter Afflerbach
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Peter Afflerbach'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 Peter Afflerbach with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter Afflerbach more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Peter Afflerbach
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter Afflerbach. 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 Peter Afflerbach. The network helps show where Peter Afflerbach may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Peter Afflerbach
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Peter Afflerbach.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Peter Afflerbach 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 Peter Afflerbach. Peter Afflerbach is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Moje, Elizabeth Birr, Peter Afflerbach, Patricia Enciso, & Nonie K. Lesaux. (2020). Handbook of Reading Research, Volume V. Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo).11 indexed citations
Veenman, Marcel V. J., B.H.A.M. van Hout‐Wolters, & Peter Afflerbach. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning. 1(1). 3–14.1294 indexed citations breakdown →
7.
Afflerbach, Peter & Bruce A. VanSledright. (2001). Hath! Doth! What? Middle Graders Reading Innovative History Text.. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 44(8). 696–707.48 indexed citations
Afflerbach, Peter. (1994). Involving Students in Assessing Their Reading: The Winter Count.. The Reading Teacher. 48(1). 80–84.1 indexed citations
11.
Afflerbach, Peter. (1993). Report Cards and Reading.. The Reading Teacher. 46(6).
12.
Afflerbach, Peter. (1993). STAIR: A System for Recording and Using What We Observe and Know about Our Students.. The Reading Teacher. 47(3).2 indexed citations
13.
Afflerbach, Peter, et al.. (1993). The Balancing Act (Reading Assessment).. The Reading Teacher. 47(1). 62–64.2 indexed citations
Hare, Victoria Chou, James W. Cunningham, David W. Moore, et al.. (1990). La comprensión lectora : cómo trabajar la idea principal en el aula.8 indexed citations
Afflerbach, Peter. (1987). How Are Main Idea Statements Constructed? Watch the Experts!.. The Journal of Reading. 30(6).6 indexed citations
19.
Afflerbach, Peter. (1985). Statewide Assessment of Writing..2 indexed citations
20.
Afflerbach, Peter. (1979). A Basic Vocabulary of U.S. Federal Social Program Applications and Forms.. The Journal of Reading. 23(4).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.