Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.
- Authors
- Paul R. Pintrich
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w75383677 →Countries where authors are citing Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.
This map shows the geographic impact of Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.. 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 Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.
This network shows the impact of Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks..
About Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks.
This paper, published in 1992, received 483 indexed citations . Written by Paul R. Pintrich covering the research area of Education. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Education (289 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (230 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (183 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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w75383677.