Jonathan A. Smith
Impact in
- Clinical Psychology top 0.2%
- Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Family and Disability Support Research
- Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
- Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
- Migration, Health and Trauma
- Social Psychology top 0.2%
Papers in
-
- Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications 10
- Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics 8
- Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health 7
- Co-authors
- Mike Osborn (9 shared papers)Virginia Eatough (13 shared papers)Pnina Shinebourne (5 shared papers)Maria Jarman (3 shared papers)Richard de Visser (5 shared papers)Rachel Shaw (4 shared papers)Tina Miller (3 shared papers)David R. Jones (3 shared papers)
- Journals
- Qualitative Research in Psychology (8 papers)Journal of Health Psychology (8 papers)Psychology and Health (7 papers)British Journal of Health Psychology (4 papers)Disability and Rehabilitation (4 papers)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomUnited StatesNorway
In The Last Decade
Jonathan A. Smith
205 papers receiving 16.5k citations
Jonathan A. Smith's Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 199
- Clinical Psychology 4.8k
- Social Psychology 2.9k
- General Health Professions 2.5k
- Applied Psychology 512
- Safety Research 873
Countries citing papers authored by Jonathan A. Smith
This map shows the geographic impact of Jonathan A. Smith'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 Jonathan A. Smith with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jonathan A. Smith more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Jonathan A. Smith
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jonathan A. Smith. 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 Jonathan A. Smith. The network helps show where Jonathan A. Smith may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Jonathan A. Smith, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 217 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Beyond the divide between cognition and discourse: Using interpretative phenomenological analysis in health psychology Hit paper breakdown → | 1996 | 1558 |
| 2 | Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 1301 |
| 3 | Doing Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 1999 | 1239 |
| 4 | Interpretative phenomenological analysis. Hit paper breakdown → | 2012 | 1236 |
| 5 | Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 2010 | 983 |
| 6 | Semi-Structured Interviewing and Qualitative Analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 1995 | 977 |
| 7 | How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective Hit paper breakdown → | 2006 | 671 |
| 8 | Interpretative phenomenological analysis as a useful methodology for research on the lived experience of pain Hit paper breakdown → | 2014 | 647 |
| 9 | Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 2007 | 524 |
| 10 | Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods Hit paper breakdown → | 2007 | 461 |
| 11 | Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 432 |
| 12 | 2006 | 401 | |
| 13 | Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 309 |
| 14 | 1998 | 294 | |
| 15 | 2004 | 244 | |
| 16 | 2006 | 211 | |
| 17 | 2002 | 207 | |
| 18 | 2007 | 206 | |
| 19 | Achieving excellence in interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): Four markers of high quality Hit paper breakdown → | 2021 | 197 |
| 20 | Interpretative phenomenological analysis. Hit paper breakdown → | 2021 | 195 |
About Jonathan A. Smith
Jonathan A. Smith is a scholar working on Clinical Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, Social Psychology, General Health Professions and Psychiatry and Mental health, having authored 217 papers that have together received 17.9k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include BRCA gene mutations in cancer (11 papers), Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications (10 papers), Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases (9 papers), Empathy and Medical Education (8 papers), Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics (8 papers), Identity, Memory, and Therapy (7 papers), Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health (7 papers) and HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions (7 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Clinical Psychology (4.8k citations), Social Psychology (2.9k citations), General Health Professions (2.5k citations), Applied Psychology (512 citations) and Safety Research (873 citations). Jonathan A. Smith has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Norway. Frequent co-authors include Mike Osborn, Virginia Eatough, Pnina Shinebourne, Maria Jarman, Richard de Visser, Rachel Shaw, Tina Miller, David R. Jones, Mary Dixon‐Woods and Andrew Booth. Their work appears in journals such as Qualitative Research in Psychology, Journal of Health Psychology, Psychology and Health, British Journal of Health Psychology and Disability and Rehabilitation.
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.