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.
Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences
20033.5k citationsTrevor G. Bond, Christine Foxprofile →
Applying the Rasch Model
20011.2k citationsTrevor G. Bond, Christine Foxprofile →
Countries citing papers authored by Trevor G. Bond
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Trevor G. Bond'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 Trevor G. Bond with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Trevor G. Bond more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Trevor G. Bond. 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 Trevor G. Bond. The network helps show where Trevor G. Bond may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Trevor G. Bond
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Trevor G. Bond.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Trevor G. Bond 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 Trevor G. Bond. Trevor G. Bond is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Finger, Glenn, Romina Jamieson-Proctor, Robert Cavanagh, et al.. (2013). Teaching Teachers for the Future (TTF) Project TPACK Survey: Summary of the Key Findings. QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology). 27(3). 13–25.29 indexed citations
7.
Jamieson-Proctor, Romina, Peter Albion, Glenn Finger, et al.. (2013). Development of the TTF TPACK Survey Instrument. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 27(3). 26–35.70 indexed citations
Jamieson-Proctor, Romina, Glenn Finger, Peter Albion, et al.. (2012). Teaching Teachers for the Future (TTF) Project: Development of the TTF TPACK Survey Instrument. University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland). 27(3). 293.4 indexed citations
Bond, Trevor G., et al.. (2007). Measuring up for big school: a role for cognitive development. ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University).2 indexed citations
15.
Bond, Trevor G.. (2004). Validity and assessment: a Rasch measurement perspective. ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University). 5(2). 181–196.55 indexed citations
16.
Bond, Trevor G., et al.. (2003). Measuring client satisfaction with public education II: comparing schools with state benchmarks.. PubMed. 4(3). 258–68.8 indexed citations
17.
Bond, Trevor G., et al.. (2003). Measuring client satisfaction with public education I: meeting competing demands in establishing state-wide benchmarks.. PubMed. 4(2). 111–23.7 indexed citations
18.
Bond, Trevor G., et al.. (2002). Parents' and students' satisfaction with the use of information technology in government schools in Queensland, Australia. ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University). 55–59.1 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.