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.
Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning
2009429 citationsSarah Gielen, Elien Peeters et al.Learning and Instructionprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Sarah Gielen'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 Gielen with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Sarah Gielen more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Sarah Gielen. 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 Gielen. The network helps show where Sarah Gielen may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Sarah Gielen
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Sarah Gielen.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Sarah Gielen 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 Gielen. Sarah Gielen is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Desmet, Piet, et al.. (2016). Learner motivation in a French L2 context: Teacher motivational practices and student attitudes in relation to proficiency. 13(13). 93–126.
Gielen, Sarah, et al.. (2014). A country level longitudinal study on the effect of student age, class size and socio-economic status - based on PIRLS 2001, 2006 & 2011. Lirias (KU Leuven).1 indexed citations
9.
Liu, Hongqiang, et al.. (2014). A cross-country comparison of the effect of family social capital on reading literacy, based on PISA 2009. Lirias (KU Leuven).
Landeghem, Georges Van, Bieke De Fraine, Sarah Gielen, & Jan Van Damme. (2013). Vroege schoolverlaters in Vlaanderen in 2010. Indeling volgens locatie, opleidingsniveau van de moeder en moedertaal. Lirias (KU Leuven).1 indexed citations
14.
Damme, Jan Van, et al.. (2013). Sociale ongelijkheid en ongelijkheid op basis van thuistaal inzake wetenschapsprestaties in het Vlaamse onderwijs. Veranderingen tussen 2003 en 2011 op basis van TIMSS, vierde leerjaar. Lirias (KU Leuven).2 indexed citations
15.
Ning, Bo, Jan Van Damme, Xiangdong Yang, & Sarah Gielen. (2013). Does classroom disciplinary climate in a school matter everywhere? A cross-country comparative study. Lirias (KU Leuven).3 indexed citations
16.
Gielen, Sarah, et al.. (2010). Peiling wiskunde in het basisonderwijs - Eindrapport. Lirias (KU Leuven).1 indexed citations
17.
Gielen, Sarah, et al.. (2010). Peiling Frans in het basisonderwijs - Eindrapport. Lirias (KU Leuven).1 indexed citations
18.
Gielen, Sarah, Elien Peeters, Filip Dochy, Patrick Onghena, & Katrien Struyven. (2009). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction. 20(4). 304–315.429 indexed citations breakdown →
19.
Gielen, Sarah, et al.. (2007). Effects of formative peer-assessment on writing performance: What is the most beneficial role of the assessee?. Lirias (KU Leuven).1 indexed citations
20.
Gielen, Sarah. (2007). Peer assessment as a tool for learning. Lirias (KU Leuven).14 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.