Robert O. Brush

713 total citations
11 papers, 516 citations indexed

About

Robert O. Brush is a scholar working on Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Economics and Econometrics and Global and Planetary Change. According to data from OpenAlex, Robert O. Brush has authored 11 papers receiving a total of 516 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 5 papers in Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, 5 papers in Economics and Econometrics and 5 papers in Global and Planetary Change. Recurrent topics in Robert O. Brush's work include Economic and Environmental Valuation (5 papers), Urban Green Space and Health (5 papers) and Land Use and Ecosystem Services (4 papers). Robert O. Brush is often cited by papers focused on Economic and Environmental Valuation (5 papers), Urban Green Space and Health (5 papers) and Land Use and Ecosystem Services (4 papers). Robert O. Brush collaborates with scholars based in United States. Robert O. Brush's co-authors include Elwood L. Shafer, Ervin H. Zube, Julius Gy. Fábos, Yi‐Fu Tuan, Richard Chenoweth, James F. Palmer, Jack Ward Thomas, Richard M. DeGraaf, Arthur W. Magill and Rowan A. Rowntree and has published in prestigious journals such as Landscape and Urban Planning, Forest Science and Geographical Review.

In The Last Decade

Robert O. Brush

10 papers receiving 446 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Robert O. Brush United States	8	315	269	122	83	71	11	516
James L. Sell United States	6	376 1.2×	329 1.2×	194 1.6×	102 1.2×	71 1.0×	7	659
J.F. Coeterier Netherlands	7	353 1.1×	321 1.2×	133 1.1×	85 1.0×	67 0.9×	14	542
Richard Chenoweth United States	9	239 0.8×	217 0.8×	115 0.9×	67 0.8×	59 0.8×	13	558
Julius Gy. Fábos United States	11	335 1.1×	400 1.5×	111 0.9×	60 0.7×	57 0.8×	24	704
Eeva Karjalainen Finland	8	236 0.7×	265 1.0×	48 0.4×	80 1.0×	75 1.1×	15	437
David G. Pitt United States	10	213 0.7×	178 0.7×	191 1.6×	163 2.0×	101 1.4×	29	516
Andrew Lothian Australia	4	270 0.9×	280 1.0×	165 1.4×	66 0.8×	42 0.6×	10	479
Marjanne Sevenant Belgium	5	266 0.8×	335 1.2×	114 0.9×	56 0.7×	70 1.0×	13	485
Einar Strumse Norway	6	493 1.6×	331 1.2×	139 1.1×	133 1.6×	50 0.7×	8	636
Robert L. Thayer United States	9	142 0.5×	153 0.6×	169 1.4×	44 0.5×	26 0.4×	17	413

Countries citing papers authored by Robert O. Brush

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Robert O. Brush

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Robert O. Brush. 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 Robert O. Brush. The network helps show where Robert O. Brush may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Robert O. Brush

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Robert O. Brush. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Robert O. Brush 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 Robert O. Brush. Robert O. Brush 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:

11 of 11 papers shown

1.

Brush, Robert O., et al.. (2000). Group differences in the enjoyability of driving through rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. 47(1-2). 39–45. 77 indexed citations

2.

Brush, Robert O.. (1981). Landform and scenic preference: A research note. Landscape and Planning. 8(3). 301–306. 12 indexed citations

3.

Brush, Robert O.. (1980). Nature in cities: the natural environment in the design and development of urban green space. Urban Ecology. 4(4). 339–340. 19 indexed citations

4.

Brush, Robert O.. (1979). The Attractiveness of Woodlands: Perceptions of Forest Landowners in Massachusetts. Forest Science. 25(3). 495–506. 58 indexed citations

5.

Brush, Robert O. & James F. Palmer. (1979). Measuring the impact of urbanization on scenic quality: land use change in the northeast. 35. 17 indexed citations

6.

Magill, Arthur W., Rowan A. Rowntree, & Robert O. Brush. (1979). Visual impacts in the urban-wildland interface. 35. 1 indexed citations

7.

Brush, Robert O., et al.. (1979). Visual screening potential of forest vegetation. Urban Ecology. 4(3). 207–216. 7 indexed citations

8.

Brush, Robert O., et al.. (1978). Measuring scenic quality at the urban fringe. Landscape Research. 3(3). 9–14. 10 indexed citations

9.

Shafer, Elwood L. & Robert O. Brush. (1977). How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes. Landscape and Planning. 4. 237–256. 109 indexed citations

10.

Tuan, Yi‐Fu, Ervin H. Zube, Robert O. Brush, & Julius Gy. Fábos. (1976). Landscape Assessment: Values, Perceptions, and Resources. Geographical Review. 66(3). 368–368. 203 indexed citations

11.

Thomas, Jack Ward, Robert O. Brush, & Richard M. DeGraaf. (1973). Invite Wildlife to Your Backyard.. 11(3). 5. 3 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact