Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision
- Authors
- Martha J. Farah
- Journal
- MIT Press eBooks
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w15111184 →Countries where authors are citing Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision
This map shows the geographic impact of Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision. 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 Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision
This network shows the impact of Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision.
About Visual agnosia : disorders of object recognition and what they tell us about normal vision
This paper, published in 1990, received 496 indexed citations . Written by Martha J. Farah. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Cognitive Neuroscience (444 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (117 citations) and Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (94 citations). Published in MIT Press eBooks.
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/w15111184.