Scientific Studies of Reading

692 papers and 34.1k indexed citations i.

About

The 692 papers published in Scientific Studies of Reading in the last decades have received a total of 34.1k indexed citations. Papers published in Scientific Studies of Reading usually cover Developmental and Educational Psychology (665 papers), Education (267 papers) and Cognitive Neuroscience (223 papers) specifically the topics of Reading and Literacy Development (644 papers), Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills (214 papers) and Language Development and Disorders (186 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Scientific Studies of Reading are Charles A. Perfetti, Linnea C. Ehri, Monique Sénéchal, Ludo Verhoeven, Peter F. de Jong, Richard K. Wagner, Catherine McBride‐Chang, Joseph Z. Stafura, Karin Landerl and Joseph R. Jenkins.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Scientific Studies of Reading

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Scientific Studies of Reading. 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 Scientific Studies of Reading.

Countries where authors publish in Scientific Studies of Reading

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Scientific Studies of Reading. 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 Scientific Studies of Reading with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Scientific Studies of Reading 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