Sarah E. Williams

654 total citations
27 papers, 550 citations indexed

About

Sarah E. Williams is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Sarah E. Williams has authored 27 papers receiving a total of 550 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 11 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 9 papers in Developmental and Educational Psychology and 8 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. Recurrent topics in Sarah E. Williams's work include Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism (11 papers), Reading and Literacy Development (7 papers) and Voice and Speech Disorders (6 papers). Sarah E. Williams is often cited by papers focused on Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism (11 papers), Reading and Literacy Development (7 papers) and Voice and Speech Disorders (6 papers). Sarah E. Williams collaborates with scholars based in United States, Australia and Norway. Sarah E. Williams's co-authors include Gerald J. Canter, Jennifer Watson, Joseph B. Watson, Richard M. Ryckman, Tracey Wade, Joel A. Gold, Ellen Lenney, Linley A. Denson, Earl J. Seaver and William F. Stone and has published in prestigious journals such as Clinical Psychology Review, Neuropsychologia and Personality and Individual Differences.

In The Last Decade

Sarah E. Williams

26 papers receiving 511 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Sarah E. Williams United States 13 205 162 127 124 114 27 550
Yishai Tobin Israel 13 156 0.8× 92 0.6× 256 2.0× 275 2.2× 38 0.3× 70 693
José Adrián Spain 11 147 0.7× 202 1.2× 114 0.9× 114 0.9× 125 1.1× 27 504
Nancy A. Creaghead United States 12 215 1.0× 55 0.3× 305 2.4× 73 0.6× 36 0.3× 32 573
Laura W. Plexico United States 15 287 1.4× 137 0.8× 265 2.1× 364 2.9× 74 0.6× 38 879
Monica L. Bellon-Harn United States 14 148 0.7× 32 0.2× 138 1.1× 24 0.2× 30 0.3× 57 535
Ursula Scherer Switzerland 5 82 0.4× 42 0.3× 24 0.2× 112 0.9× 19 0.2× 7 329
Georgia Dacakis Australia 18 71 0.3× 859 5.3× 53 0.4× 456 3.7× 200 1.8× 28 1.1k
Elspeth McCartney United Kingdom 16 162 0.8× 39 0.2× 576 4.5× 38 0.3× 56 0.5× 55 905
Traci Walker United Kingdom 14 132 0.6× 35 0.2× 42 0.3× 178 1.4× 13 0.1× 33 595
Carol Flexer United States 16 410 2.0× 18 0.1× 345 2.7× 41 0.3× 168 1.5× 46 703

Countries citing papers authored by Sarah E. Williams

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Sarah E. Williams

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Sarah E. Williams. 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 Sarah E. Williams. The network helps show where Sarah E. Williams may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Sarah E. Williams

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Sarah E. Williams. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Sarah E. Williams 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 Sarah E. Williams. Sarah E. Williams 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.
Roy, Loriene & Sarah E. Williams. (2014). Reference Education: A Test Bed for Collaborative Learning. The Reference Librarian. 55(4). 368–374. 4 indexed citations
2.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (2012). A review of the definitions of outcome used in the treatment of bulimia nervosa. Clinical Psychology Review. 32(4). 292–300. 38 indexed citations
3.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (2010). Dialectical Behavioural Therapy and Borderline Personality Disorder: Effects on Service Utilisation and Self-Reported Symptoms. Behaviour Change. 27(4). 251–264. 11 indexed citations
4.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (2008). A measure of inspection time in 4‐year‐old children: The Benny Bee IT task. British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 27(3). 669–680. 3 indexed citations
5.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1995). The effects of topic and listener familiarity on discourse variables in procedural and narrative discourse tasks. Journal of Communication Disorders. 28(1). 39–55. 14 indexed citations
6.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1994). The influence of topic and listener familiarity on aphasic discourse. Journal of Communication Disorders. 27(3). 207–222. 14 indexed citations
7.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1991). An investigation of naming errors following semantic and phonemic cueing. Neuropsychologia. 29(11). 1083–1093. 15 indexed citations
8.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1990). Perceptual characteristics of tracheoesophageal voice produced using four prosthetic/occlusion combinations. The Laryngoscope. 100(3). 290–293. 12 indexed citations
9.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1990). The effects of grammatic class and cue type on cueing responsiveness in aphasia. Brain and Language. 38(1). 48–60. 15 indexed citations
10.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1989). Temporal and perceptual characteristics of tracheoesophageal voice. The Laryngoscope. 99(8). 846–850. 17 indexed citations
11.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1989). The efficacy of two types of cues in aphasic patients. Aphasiology. 3(7). 619–626. 17 indexed citations
12.
Rowland, Guy L., Robert E. Franken, Sarah E. Williams, & Todd F. Heatherton. (1988). The perception of sensation seeking in familiar and unfamiliar others. Personality and Individual Differences. 9(2). 237–241.
13.
Williams, Sarah E. & Earl J. Seaver. (1986). A comparison of speech sound durations in three syndromes of aphasia. Brain and Language. 29(1). 171–182. 7 indexed citations
14.
Williams, Sarah E., et al.. (1985). The effect of homogenous versus heterogeneous stimuli on the confrontation-naming performance of aphasics. Journal of Communication Disorders. 18(6). 447–459. 4 indexed citations
15.
Williams, Sarah E. & Richard M. Ryckman. (1984). The effects of sensation seeking and misattribution of arousal on dyadic interactions between similar or dissimilar strangers. ˜The œJournal of mind and behavior. 5(3). 337–349. 2 indexed citations
16.
Williams, Sarah E.. (1984). Influence of written form on reading comprehension in aphasia. Journal of Communication Disorders. 17(3). 165–174. 7 indexed citations
17.
Williams, Sarah E.. (1984). Left-Right Ideological Differences in Blaming Victims. Political Psychology. 5(4). 573–573. 72 indexed citations
18.
Williams, Sarah E.. (1983). Factors influencing naming performance in aphasia: A review of the literature. Journal of Communication Disorders. 16(5). 357–372. 17 indexed citations
19.
Williams, Sarah E. & Gerald J. Canter. (1982). The influence of situational context on naming performance in aphasic syndromes. Brain and Language. 17(1). 92–106. 80 indexed citations
20.
Williams, Sarah E. & Gerald J. Canter. (1981). On the Assessment of Naming Disturbances in Adult Aphasia. The Aphasiology Archive (University of Pittsburgh). 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

Rankless by CCL
2026