Ken Springer

1.9k citations
30 papers · 1.5k · h-index 18

Impact in

Papers in

Ken Springer

30 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Peers

Ken Springer
Comparison fields: 5 of 109
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology 842
  • History and Philosophy of Science 142
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 418
  • Social Psychology 431
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 249
Replace Joëlle Proust with:
Joëlle Proust France
Karen Bartsch United States
Laraine McDonough United States
Barbara Koslowski United States
Johannes Roessler United Kingdom
Ernő Téglás Austria
Christoph Hoerl United Kingdom
Merry Bullock Germany
Mary Jo Rattermann United States
Michael I. Bloch United States
Ken Springer relative to Joëlle Proust France Joëlle Proust's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.2×
Joëlle Proust · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Ken Springer

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Ken Springer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 6 scholars most cited alongside Ken Springer, 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 Ken Springer Line = papers co-authored together Ken Springer 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 1989185
2 1992180
3 1991150
4 1991112
5 199292
6 199274
7 199667
8
Educational Research: A Contextual Approach
200964
9 199362
10 199261
11 199556
12 199456
13 199251
14 199950
15 199649
16 199541
17 199626
18 199419
19 201216
20 199615

About Ken Springer

Ken Springer is a scholar working on Developmental and Educational Psychology, History and Philosophy of Science, Social Psychology, Education and Statistics and Probability, having authored 30 papers that have together received 1.5k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Child and Animal Learning Development (14 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (3 papers), Animal and Plant Science Education (3 papers), Evolution and Science Education (3 papers), Behavioral and Psychological Studies (2 papers), Science Education and Pedagogy (2 papers), Educational Environments and Student Outcomes (2 papers) and Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Developmental and Educational Psychology (842 citations), History and Philosophy of Science (142 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (418 citations), Social Psychology (431 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (249 citations). Ken Springer has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Frank C. Keil, Scott H. Johnson, James E. Cutting, Diane S. Berry, Gregory L. Murphy and Michael Hugh Kelly. Their work appears in journals such as Child Development, Cognitive Development, Psychological Review, Journal of Experimental Psychology General and Developmental Psychology.

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