Grace Teo

422 citations
30 papers · 237 · h-index 10

Impact in

Papers in

Grace Teo

30 papers receiving 228 citations

Peers

Grace Teo
Comparison fields: 5 of 63
  • Social Psychology 136
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology 26
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 44
  • General Decision Sciences 6
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology 35
Replace Charlene K. Stokes with:
Charlene K. Stokes United States
Bjørn Sætrevik Norway
Shezeen Oah South Korea
Thomas Loveday Australia
Diane L. Damos United States
Jason P. Kring United States
S. David Leonard United States
Jeremy Schwark United States
Brian T. Schreiber United States
April Rose Panganiban United States
Grace Teo relative to Charlene K. Stokes United States Charlene K. Stokes's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Charlene K. Stokes · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Grace Teo

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Grace Teo

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Grace Teo. 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 Grace Teo. The network helps show where Grace Teo may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 21 scholars most cited alongside Grace Teo, 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 Grace Teo Line = papers co-authored together Grace Teo links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 30 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201041
2 201433
3 201225
4 201716
5 201615
6 201912
7 201710
8 199710
9 20189
10 20159
11 20117
12 20126
13 20125
14 20174
15 20123
16 20113
17 20103
18 20123
19 20123
20 20223

About Grace Teo

Grace Teo is a scholar working on Social Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, Radiological and Ultrasound Technology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Occupational Therapy, having authored 30 papers that have together received 237 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Human-Automation Interaction and Safety (19 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (7 papers), Occupational Health and Safety Research (6 papers), Occupational Health and Performance (4 papers), Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring (3 papers), Mental Health Research Topics (3 papers), International Student and Expatriate Challenges (3 papers) and Risk and Safety Analysis (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Social Psychology (136 citations), Radiological and Ultrasound Technology (26 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (44 citations), General Decision Sciences (6 citations) and Developmental and Educational Psychology (35 citations). Grace Teo has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Australia and Singapore. Frequent co-authors include James L. Szalma, Peter A. Hancock, Lauren Reinerman-Jones, Steven L. Berman, Gerald Matthews, Seth J. Schwartz, Gabriella M. Hancock, Gerald Matthews, Daniel Barber and Weining C. Chang. Their work appears in journals such as Applied Ergonomics, Personality and Individual Differences, Ergonomics, Acta Psychologica and Child & Youth Care Forum.

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