Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals
- Authors
- Geoff Cumming
- Journal
- Statistics in Medicine
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1002/sim.3471 →Countries where authors are citing Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals
This map shows the geographic impact of Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals. 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 Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals
This network shows the impact of Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals.
About Inference by eye: Reading the overlap of independent confidence intervals
This paper, published in 2008, received 527 indexed citations . Written by Geoff Cumming covering the research area of Statistics and Probability and Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (99 citations), Social Psychology (77 citations) and Clinical Psychology (72 citations). Published in Statistics in Medicine.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1002/sim.3471.