Frederick G. Conrad

117 papers receiving 3.6k citations

Peers

Frederick G. Conrad
Comparison fields: 5 of 167
  • Computer Science Applications 344
  • Communication 339
  • Sociology and Political Science 1.9k
  • Applied Psychology 178
  • Statistics and Probability 226
Replace Adam W. Meade with:
Adam W. Meade United States
Huy Le United States
Ulf‐Dietrich Reips Germany
Michael Bošnjak Germany
Stephen Gorard United Kingdom
Joseph K. Goodman United States
Samuel Greiff Luxembourg
Eyal Peer Israel
Colleen M. Seifert United States
A. T. Panter United States
Frederick G. Conrad relative to Adam W. Meade United States Adam W. Meade's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.6×
Adam W. Meade · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Frederick G. Conrad

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Frederick G. Conrad's research. 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 Frederick G. Conrad with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Frederick G. Conrad more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Frederick G. Conrad

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Frederick G. Conrad. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Frederick G. Conrad. The network helps show where Frederick G. Conrad may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Frederick G. Conrad, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Frederick G. Conrad Line = papers co-authored together Frederick G. Conrad links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 118 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1989222
2 2012210
3 2006206
4 1997182
5 2013146
6 2008140
7 2016117
8 2000115
9 2004104
10 200795
11 201591
12 201188
13 198988
14 201779
15 201678
16 200976
17 201576
18
Voting Technology: The Not-So-Simple Act of Casting a Ballot
200774
19 199673
20 201371

About Frederick G. Conrad

Frederick G. Conrad is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Artificial Intelligence, Language and Linguistics, Communication and Computer Science Applications, having authored 118 papers that have together received 4.0k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Survey Methodology and Nonresponse (63 papers), Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods (20 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (15 papers), Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies (14 papers), Speech and dialogue systems (13 papers), Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing (11 papers), Social Media and Politics (9 papers) and Economic and Environmental Valuation (7 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Computer Science Applications (344 citations), Communication (339 citations), Sociology and Political Science (1.9k citations), Applied Psychology (178 citations) and Statistics and Probability (226 citations). Frederick G. Conrad has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Norway and Germany. Frequent co-authors include Mick P. Couper, Roger Tourangeau, Michael F. Schober, Chan Zhang, Eleanor Singer, Albert T. Corbett, John R. Anderson, Johnny Blair, Christopher Antoun and Lance J. Rips. Their work appears in journals such as Public Opinion Quarterly, Social Science Computer Review, Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, Field Methods and International Journal of Social Research Methodology.

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact