This map shows the geographic impact of Tom Lumley'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 Tom Lumley with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tom Lumley more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Tom Lumley. 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 Tom Lumley. The network helps show where Tom Lumley may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Tom Lumley
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Tom Lumley.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Tom Lumley 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 Tom Lumley. Tom Lumley 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.
Lumley, Tom, et al.. (2015). Class 6 proficiency in Afghanistan 2013: Outcomes of a learning assessment of mathematical, reading and writing literacy. ACEReSearch (Australian Council for Educational Research).3 indexed citations
2.
Lumley, Tom, et al.. (2012). A framework for predicting item difficulty in reading tests. ACEReSearch (Australian Council for Educational Research).6 indexed citations
3.
Lumley, Tom, et al.. (2012). How well do young people deal with contradictory and unreliable information on line? What the PISA digital reading assessment tells us. ACEReSearch (Australian Council for Educational Research).5 indexed citations
4.
Kirsch, Irwin S., et al.. (2009). How can we predict difficulty in PISA reading items ? The process of describing item difficulty. Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège).3 indexed citations
5.
Lumley, Tom. (2005). Assessing second language writing.5 indexed citations
6.
Lumley, Tom. (2005). Assessing Second Language Writing: The Rater’s Perspective. Medical Entomology and Zoology.119 indexed citations
Lumley, Tom. (2001). Statistical training for epidemiologists: a view from afar. 8(4). 5.1 indexed citations
9.
Lumley, Tom & Barry O’Sullivan. (2001). The effect of test-taker sex, audience and topic on task performance in tape-mediated assessment of speaking. 10(2).1 indexed citations
Lumley, Tom, et al.. (2000). Conflicting perspectives on the role of test preparation in relation to learning. PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University). 5(1). 50–80.16 indexed citations
Saville, Nick, Caroline Clapham, Alan Davies, et al.. (1996). Performance testing, cognition and assessment : selected papers from the 15th Language Testing Research Colloquium (LTRC), Cambridge and Arnhem. Cambridge University Press eBooks.19 indexed citations
14.
Lumley, Tom. (1995). The judgements of language-trained raters and doctors in a test of English for health professionals. 4(1).2 indexed citations
15.
Alderson, J. Charles & Tom Lumley. (1995). Responses and replies. Language Testing. 12(1). 121–130.11 indexed citations
16.
Lumley, Tom, Brian K. Lynch, & Tim McNamara. (1994). A new approach to standard-setting in language assessment. 3(2).16 indexed citations
Lumley, Tom. (1993). Reading comprehension sub-skills: teachers' perceptions of content in an EAP test. 2(1).5 indexed citations
19.
Lumley, Tom & Penny McKay. (1992). The NLLIA ESL Development Project and assessment in the curriculum. 2(2). 10.2 indexed citations
20.
Brown, Annie, et al.. (1992). Mapping abilities and skill levels using Rasch techniques. 1(1).4 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.