Jane E. Aspell

2.2k citations
48 papers · 1.6k · h-index 22

Impact in

Papers in

Jane E. Aspell

46 papers receiving 1.6k citations

Peers

Jane E. Aspell
Comparison fields: 5 of 101
  • Human-Computer Interaction 417
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 807
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 530
  • Social Psychology 548
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 288
Replace Lara Maister with:
Lara Maister United Kingdom
Paul M. Jenkinson United Kingdom
Anouk Keizer Netherlands
Silvio Ionta Switzerland
Lukas Heydrich Switzerland
Shahar Arzy Israel
Roy Salomon Switzerland
India Morrison Sweden
Nicole David Germany
Laura Crucianelli United Kingdom
Jane E. Aspell relative to Lara Maister United Kingdom Lara Maister's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.2×
Lara Maister · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Jane E. Aspell

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Jane E. Aspell

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jane E. Aspell. 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 Jane E. Aspell. The network helps show where Jane E. Aspell may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Jane E. Aspell, 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 Jane E. Aspell Line = papers co-authored together Jane E. Aspell links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 48 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2013297
2 2013192
3 2009178
4 2018133
5 201960
6 200549
7 201248
8 201947
9 201944
10 201339
11 201638
12 201837
13 201932
14 201928
15 201127
16 201727
17 201327
18 202025
19 201225
20 201024

About Jane E. Aspell

Jane E. Aspell is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychiatry and Mental health, Social Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction and Clinical Psychology, having authored 48 papers that have together received 1.6k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments (20 papers), Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts (17 papers), Action Observation and Synchronization (12 papers), Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies (9 papers), Tactile and Sensory Interactions (8 papers), Visual perception and processing mechanisms (8 papers), Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs (5 papers) and Multisensory perception and integration (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Human-Computer Interaction (417 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (807 citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (530 citations), Social Psychology (548 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (288 citations). Jane E. Aspell has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Switzerland and Malaysia. Frequent co-authors include Olaf Blanke, Bruno Herbelin, Lukas Heydrich, Bigna Lenggenhager, Jennifer Todd, Viren Swami, Trevor J. Dodds, Betty J. Mohler, HH Bülthoff and Steven D. Stagg. Their work appears in journals such as Body Image, Scientific Reports, PLoS ONE, European Journal of Neuroscience and Experimental Brain 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact