Richard Pearce‐Moses

476 total citations · 1 hit paper
9 papers, 217 citations indexed

About

Richard Pearce‐Moses is a scholar working on Conservation, Information Systems and Anthropology. According to data from OpenAlex, Richard Pearce‐Moses has authored 9 papers receiving a total of 217 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 6 papers in Conservation, 2 papers in Information Systems and 2 papers in Anthropology. Recurrent topics in Richard Pearce‐Moses's work include Digital and Traditional Archives Management (5 papers), Library Science and Information Systems (2 papers) and Digital Humanities and Scholarship (2 papers). Richard Pearce‐Moses is often cited by papers focused on Digital and Traditional Archives Management (5 papers), Library Science and Information Systems (2 papers) and Digital Humanities and Scholarship (2 papers). Richard Pearce‐Moses collaborates with scholars based in United States. Richard Pearce‐Moses's co-authors include Bruce Fulton, Elizabeth Yakel, John J. O’Shea and Paul Brockman and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Journal of American History and The American Archivist.

In The Last Decade

Richard Pearce‐Moses

7 papers receiving 145 citations

Hit Papers

align trajectories sort by overperformance

What are hit papers?

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.

A glossary of archival and records terminology

2006 179 citations Richard Pearce‐Moses Choice Reviews Online profile →

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Richard Pearce‐Moses United States	4	131	78	40	36	32	9	217
Frank Upward Australia	10	196 1.5×	83 1.1×	53 1.3×	52 1.4×	31 1.0×	17	304
Barbara Reed Australia	9	127 1.0×	62 0.8×	37 0.9×	41 1.1×	15 0.5×	32	216
Michael Piggott Australia	7	141 1.1×	36 0.5×	44 1.1×	34 0.9×	27 0.8×	30	203
Karen F. Gracy United States	8	87 0.7×	57 0.7×	23 0.6×	16 0.4×	20 0.6×	30	176
Helen Hockx‐Yu United Kingdom	9	96 0.7×	121 1.6×	13 0.3×	25 0.7×	20 0.6×	16	239
T. R. Schellenberg United States	4	174 1.3×	57 0.7×	49 1.2×	30 0.8×	18 0.6×	11	289
Deanna Marcum United States	9	35 0.3×	97 1.2×	7 0.2×	11 0.3×	25 0.8×	35	184
John Unsworth United States	8	43 0.3×	93 1.2×	4 0.1×	34 0.9×	113 3.5×	38	286
Lise Jaillant United Kingdom	6	28 0.2×	24 0.3×	9 0.2×	15 0.4×	16 0.5×	27	118
Susan Hockey United Kingdom	7	33 0.3×	54 0.7×	5 0.1×	13 0.4×	78 2.4×	17	186

Countries citing papers authored by Richard Pearce‐Moses

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Richard Pearce‐Moses

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Richard Pearce‐Moses. 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 Richard Pearce‐Moses. The network helps show where Richard Pearce‐Moses may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Richard Pearce‐Moses

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Richard Pearce‐Moses. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Richard Pearce‐Moses 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 Richard Pearce‐Moses. Richard Pearce‐Moses is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

9 of 9 papers shown

1.

Fulton, Bruce, et al.. (2011). Educating Digital Curators: Challenges and Opportunities. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 6(2). 146–164. 11 indexed citations

2.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard. (2009). The PeDALS Project. Against the grain. 21(2). 2 indexed citations

3.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard & Elizabeth Yakel. (2007). The “MayDay” project: promoting disaster preparedness. OCLC Systems & Services. 23(1). 16–20. 3 indexed citations

4.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard. (2007). Caught in the Middle: Access to State Government Records in the United States. 1 indexed citations

5.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard. (2007). Janus in Cyberspace: Archives on the Threshold of the Digital Era. The American Archivist. 70(1). 13–22. 9 indexed citations

6.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard, et al.. (2006). From Bibliographer to Curator: archival strategies for capturing web publications. IFLA Journal. 32(1). 41–47. 1 indexed citations

7.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard. (2006). A glossary of archival and records terminology. Choice Reviews Online. 43(5). 43–2535. 179 indexed citations breakdown →

8.

Pearce‐Moses, Richard, et al.. (1993). Does AMC Mean "Archives Made Confusing"? Patron Understanding of USMARC AMC Catalog Records. The American Archivist. 56(2). 330–341. 11 indexed citations

9.

O’Shea, John J., et al.. (1989). Nevada Biographical and Genealogical Sketch Index. Journal of American History. 75(4). 1389–1389.

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