Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas
Impact in
- Education 471
- Journal
- CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research)
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w90552683 →Countries where authors are citing Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas
This map shows the geographic impact of Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas. 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 Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas
This network shows the impact of Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas.
About Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children's ideas
This paper, published in 1993, received 549 indexed citations . Written by Rosalind Driver, Peter Rushworth and Valerie Wood-Robinson. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Education (471 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (246 citations), Social Psychology (98 citations), Physical and Theoretical Chemistry (47 citations) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (46 citations). Published in CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear 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/w90552683.