Limor Peer

825 citations
26 papers · 524 · h-index 10

Impact in

Papers in

Limor Peer

22 papers receiving 473 citations

Peers

Limor Peer
Comparison fields: 5 of 72
  • Communication 308
  • Information Systems and Management 60
  • Sociology and Political Science 251
  • Literature and Literary Theory 39
  • Gender Studies 29
Replace Michael Koliska with:
Michael Koliska United States
Raul Ferrer Conill Sweden
Dejin Zhao United States
Dmitry Epstein United States
Merja Mahrt Germany
Rasmus Helles Denmark
Clark F. Greer United States
R. David Lankes United States
Daniel Cunliffe United Kingdom
Esther Weltevrede Netherlands
Limor Peer relative to Michael Koliska United States Michael Koliska's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.9×
Michael Koliska · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Limor Peer

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Limor Peer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 22 scholars most cited alongside Limor Peer, 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 Limor Peer Line = papers co-authored together Limor Peer links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 26 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2014214
2 201167
3 201054
4 201443
5 201426
6 199616
7 201516
8 201215
9 199815
10 199511
11 19927
12 20217
13
The local TV news experience: How to win viewers by focusing on engagement
20076
14 20165
15 20204
16 20224
17 20223
18 20122
19 20082
20 20212

About Limor Peer

Limor Peer is a scholar working on Information Systems, Communication, Sociology and Political Science, Information Systems and Management and Management Science and Operations Research, having authored 26 papers that have together received 524 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Research Data Management Practices (11 papers), Media Studies and Communication (8 papers), Scientific Computing and Data Management (7 papers), Social Media and Politics (6 papers), Media Influence and Politics (5 papers), Data Quality and Management (5 papers), Political Influence and Corporate Strategies (1 paper) and Computational and Text Analysis Methods (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Communication (308 citations), Information Systems and Management (60 citations), Sociology and Political Science (251 citations), Literature and Literary Theory (39 citations) and Gender Studies (29 citations). Limor Peer has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Germany and Netherlands. Frequent co-authors include Thomas B. Ksiazek, Pablo J. Boczkowski, James S. Ettema, Elizabeth A. Stephenson, Lynn Vavreck, Donald P. Green, Paul Lagunes, Robin Gomila, Elizabeth Levy Paluck and Edward C. Malthouse. Their work appears in journals such as Data Intelligence, New Media & Society, PS Political Science & Politics, Data Science Journal and Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly.

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