Stacey L. Danckert

1.0k total citations
8 papers, 791 citations indexed

About

Stacey L. Danckert is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychiatry and Mental health and Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience. According to data from OpenAlex, Stacey L. Danckert has authored 8 papers receiving a total of 791 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 8 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 2 papers in Psychiatry and Mental health and 1 paper in Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience. Recurrent topics in Stacey L. Danckert's work include Memory Processes and Influences (4 papers), Memory and Neural Mechanisms (3 papers) and Motor Control and Adaptation (2 papers). Stacey L. Danckert is often cited by papers focused on Memory Processes and Influences (4 papers), Memory and Neural Mechanisms (3 papers) and Motor Control and Adaptation (2 papers). Stacey L. Danckert collaborates with scholars based in Canada and United Kingdom. Stacey L. Danckert's co-authors include Ravi S. Menon, Joseph S. Gati, Jody C. Culham, Melvyn A. Goodale, Stefan Köhler, Fergus I. M. Craik, Myra A. Fernandes, Colin M. MacLeod, James Danckert and Seyed M. Mirsattari and has published in prestigious journals such as Neuropsychologia, Experimental Brain Research and Psychology and Aging.

In The Last Decade

Stacey L. Danckert

7 papers receiving 783 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Stacey L. Danckert Canada 7 726 268 84 74 69 8 791
Angela Haffenden Canada 14 706 1.0× 285 1.1× 179 2.1× 85 1.1× 51 0.7× 21 1.2k
Catherine L. Elsinger United States 10 612 0.8× 128 0.5× 70 0.8× 51 0.7× 117 1.7× 10 764
Marit F. L. Ruitenberg Netherlands 15 518 0.7× 193 0.7× 35 0.4× 62 0.8× 119 1.7× 49 651
Arnaud Boutin France 13 484 0.7× 133 0.5× 59 0.7× 44 0.6× 107 1.6× 27 596
Annabelle Blangero France 20 871 1.2× 149 0.6× 46 0.5× 48 0.6× 26 0.4× 32 939
L. Escola France 8 333 0.5× 308 1.1× 75 0.9× 36 0.5× 97 1.4× 9 535
Halle D. Brown United States 10 705 1.0× 205 0.8× 43 0.5× 36 0.5× 122 1.8× 13 899
Claude-Alain Hauert Switzerland 17 833 1.1× 209 0.8× 29 0.3× 65 0.9× 143 2.1× 23 964
Heng‐Ru May Tan United Kingdom 11 526 0.7× 130 0.5× 56 0.7× 34 0.5× 67 1.0× 11 656
Flavia Filimon Germany 8 938 1.3× 519 1.9× 48 0.6× 132 1.8× 173 2.5× 8 1.1k

Countries citing papers authored by Stacey L. Danckert

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Stacey L. Danckert

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stacey L. Danckert. 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 Stacey L. Danckert. The network helps show where Stacey L. Danckert may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Stacey L. Danckert

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

All Works

8 of 8 papers shown
1.
Danckert, Stacey L. & Fergus I. M. Craik. (2013). Does aging affect recall more than recognition memory?. Psychology and Aging. 28(4). 902–909. 86 indexed citations
2.
Danckert, Stacey L., Colin M. MacLeod, & Myra A. Fernandes. (2011). Source-constrained retrieval influences the encoding of new information. Memory & Cognition. 39(8). 1374–1386. 19 indexed citations
3.
Culham, Jody C., et al.. (2010). fMRI reveals a dissociation of visual and somatomotor responses in human AIP during delayed grasping. Journal of Vision. 2(7). 701–701.
4.
Danckert, Stacey L., Joseph S. Gati, Ravi S. Menon, & Stefan Köhler. (2007). Perirhinal and hippocampal contributions to visual recognition memory can be distinguished from those of occipito‐temporal structures based on conscious awareness of prior occurrence. Hippocampus. 17(11). 1081–1092. 38 indexed citations
5.
Danckert, James, Seyed M. Mirsattari, Frank Bihari, et al.. (2007). Functional MRI characteristics of a focal region of cortical malformation not associated with seizure onset. Epilepsy & Behavior. 10(4). 615–625. 8 indexed citations
6.
Köhler, Stefan, Stacey L. Danckert, Joseph S. Gati, & Ravi S. Menon. (2005). Novelty responses to relational and non-relational information in the hippocampus and the parahippocampal region: A comparison based on event-related fMRI. Hippocampus. 15(6). 763–774. 139 indexed citations
7.
Danckert, James, Seyed M. Mirsattari, Stacey L. Danckert, et al.. (2003). Spared somatomotor and cognitive functions in a patient with a large porencephalic cyst revealed by fMRI. Neuropsychologia. 42(3). 405–418. 6 indexed citations
8.
Culham, Jody C., et al.. (2003). Visually guided grasping produces fMRI activation in dorsal but not ventral stream brain areas. Experimental Brain Research. 153(2). 180–189. 495 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