Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 928 indexed citations. Written by Troy D. Sadler covering the research area of Developmental and Educational Psychology and Education. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Education (787 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (509 citations) and Social Psychology (131 citations). Published in Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

Countries where authors are citing Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of 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 Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research.

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/tea.20009.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026