New Directions for Evaluation

970 papers and 12.1k indexed citations i.

About

The 970 papers published in New Directions for Evaluation in the last decades have received a total of 12.1k indexed citations. Papers published in New Directions for Evaluation usually cover Management Science and Operations Research (703 papers), General Health Professions (259 papers) and Information Systems and Management (160 papers) specifically the topics of Evaluation and Performance Assessment (696 papers), Educational Assessment and Improvement (156 papers) and Health Policy Implementation Science (133 papers). The most active scholars publishing in New Directions for Evaluation are Carol H. Weiss, Jennifer C. Greene, Valerie J. Caracelli, Paul J. Ferraro, Elizabeth Whitmore, J. Bradley Cousins, Jean A. King, Karen E. Kirkhart, Michael Quinn Patton and Thomas A. Schwandt.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in New Directions for Evaluation

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in New Directions for Evaluation. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in New Directions for Evaluation.

Countries where authors publish in New Directions for Evaluation

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in New Directions for Evaluation. 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 papers published in New Directions for Evaluation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites New Directions for Evaluation more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025