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.
Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics
2010709 citationsSharon J. Derry, Roy Pea et al.Journal of the Learning Sciencesprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Ricki Goldman'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 Ricki Goldman with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ricki Goldman more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ricki Goldman. 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 Ricki Goldman. The network helps show where Ricki Goldman may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ricki Goldman
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ricki Goldman.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ricki Goldman 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 Ricki Goldman. Ricki Goldman is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Derry, Sharon J., Roy Pea, Brigid Barron, et al.. (2010). Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 19(1). 3–53.709 indexed citations breakdown →
8.
Plass, Jan L., Ricki Goldman, Mary Flanagan, & Ken Perlin. (2009). RAPUNSEL: Improving self-efficacy and self-esteem with an educational computer game. 682–689.7 indexed citations
Goldman, Ricki, Martha E. Crosby, Karen Swan, & Peter Shea. (2004). Qualitative and quisitive research methods for describing online learning. 95–112.9 indexed citations
Hiltz, Starr Roxanne & Ricki Goldman. (2004). Learning Together Online: Research on Asynchronous Learning Networks. Medical Entomology and Zoology.137 indexed citations
14.
Goldman, Ricki. (1996). Looking through layers: Reflecting upon digital ethnography. 13(1). 23–30.2 indexed citations
15.
Goldman, Ricki. (1995). Configurational validity: A proposal for analyzing multimedia ethnographic narratives. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia. 4(2). 163–182.9 indexed citations
16.
Goldman, Ricki. (1993). Interpreting video data: The importance of a significance measure. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia. 2(3). 261–282.6 indexed citations
17.
Goldman, Ricki, et al.. (1993). The growth of a multimedia school culture: A multivoiced narrative.2 indexed citations
18.
Goldman, Ricki. (1991). A multimedia research tool for ethnographic investigation. 467–496.16 indexed citations
19.
Goldman, Ricki. (1991). Three children, three styles: A call for opening the curriculum. 235–268.1 indexed citations
20.
Goldman, Ricki. (1990). Learning Constellations: A multimedia research environment for exploring children’s theory-making. 295–318.4 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.