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.
A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment
2004486 citationsJ.T.M. Gulikers, Theo Bastiaens et al.Educational Technology Research and Developmentprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Theo Bastiaens
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Theo Bastiaens'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 Theo Bastiaens with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Theo Bastiaens more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Theo Bastiaens. 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 Theo Bastiaens. The network helps show where Theo Bastiaens may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Theo Bastiaens
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Theo Bastiaens.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Theo Bastiaens 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 Theo Bastiaens. Theo Bastiaens 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.
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2019). How Gamification Can Foster Motivation and Collaboration in Blended Learning: A Mixed Methods Case Study. The Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 30(3). 275–300.3 indexed citations
2.
Weidlich, Joshua, et al.. (2018). Effects of questioning advance organizers on learning outcomes in a web-based learning object on research and academic skills. EdMedia + Innovate Learning. 1951–1960.1 indexed citations
3.
Lipka, Alexander E., et al.. (2018). Do Creative Learners Prefer Inquiry-based Learning Instructions in Digital Education Programs?. International journal on e-learning. 17(1). 5–16.
4.
Baumöl, Ulrike, et al.. (2018). Tacit Knowledge in Virtual University Learning Environments.. International Association for Development of the Information Society.2 indexed citations
5.
Weidlich, Joshua, Karel Kreijns, Kamakshi Rajagopal, & Theo Bastiaens. (2018). What Social Presence is, what it isn’t, and how to measure it: A work in progress. EdMedia + Innovate Learning. 2142–2150.10 indexed citations
6.
Weidlich, Joshua, et al.. (2018). A Case Study in Flipped Tutoring Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Flipped Classroom Approach to English Language Tutoring. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 840–845.1 indexed citations
7.
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2018). Dropout in Distance Education and how to Prevent it. EdMedia + Innovate Learning. 1788–1799.7 indexed citations
8.
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2018). Using Gamification to Foster Intrinsic Motivation and Collaborative Learning: A Comparative Testing. EdMedia + Innovate Learning. 1128–1137.9 indexed citations
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2016). WBT and Learning Motivation in Health and Nursing Education. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia. 26(4). 1002–1009.
11.
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2013). Investigating students’ usage and acceptance of electronic books. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia. 22(4). 465–487.5 indexed citations
12.
Bastiaens, Theo, et al.. (2012). Education and Information Technology 2013: A Selection of AACE Award Papers. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS). 1–261.1 indexed citations
Schrader, Claudia & Theo Bastiaens. (2012). Computer games and learning: The relationship between design, gameplay and outcomes. DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands). 23(3). 251–271.7 indexed citations
15.
Vrieling, Emmy, Theo Bastiaens, & Sjef Stijnen. (2012). Consequences of increased self-regulated learning opportunities on student teachers’ motivation and use of metacognitive skills.. Australian Journal of Education. 37(8). 102–117.5 indexed citations
16.
Vrieling, Emmy, Theo Bastiaens, & Sjef Stijnen. (2011). Promoting Self-Regulated Learning in Primary Teacher Education. DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands). 2011(1). 1056–1062.5 indexed citations
17.
Kreijns, Karel, et al.. (2010). The Influence of Guidance on the Quality of Professional Development Plans. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. 2010(1). 98–105.1 indexed citations
18.
Bacsich, Paul, et al.. (2010). The Rise of Large Scale E-learning Initiatives Worldwide. E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. 2010(1). 2135–2143.2 indexed citations
19.
Gulikers, J.T.M., Theo Bastiaens, & Paul A. Kirschner. (2004). A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development. 52(3). 67–86.486 indexed citations breakdown →
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.