Michael S. Loop

869 citations
46 papers · 683 · h-index 14

Impact in

Papers in

Michael S. Loop

45 papers receiving 637 citations

Peers

Michael S. Loop
Comparison fields: 5 of 71
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 310
  • Sensory Systems 64
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience 236
  • Developmental Biology 16
  • Ophthalmology 65
Replace A.M. Granda with:
A.M. Granda United States
G. H. Jacobs United States
D.P.M. Northmore United States
Gary A. Williams United States
H. Gioanni France
S. Wilkie United Kingdom
Michael A. Crognale United States
J. F. W. Nuboer Netherlands
Christopher P. Heesy United States
Simo Hemilä Finland
Michael S. Loop relative to A.M. Granda United States A.M. Granda's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×10×14×
A.M. Granda · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Michael S. Loop

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Michael S. Loop

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Michael S. Loop. 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 Michael S. Loop. The network helps show where Michael S. Loop may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 23 scholars most cited alongside Michael S. Loop, 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 Michael S. Loop Line = papers co-authored together Michael S. Loop links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 46 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 1978152
2 197649
3 197747
4 197834
5 197234
6 199431
7 198730
8 197522
9 197721
10 198220
11
Temporal contrast sensitivity in amblyopia.
198217
12 198017
13 200715
14 198014
15 197913
16 197011
17 196910
18 197510
19 19849
20 19839

About Michael S. Loop

Michael S. Loop is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Social Psychology, Molecular Biology and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, having authored 46 papers that have together received 683 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Visual perception and processing mechanisms (24 papers), Neurobiology and Insect Physiology Research (13 papers), Retinal Development and Disorders (10 papers), Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies (6 papers), Neural dynamics and brain function (6 papers), Color perception and design (5 papers), Animal Behavior and Reproduction (5 papers) and Amphibian and Reptile Biology (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cognitive Neuroscience (310 citations), Sensory Systems (64 citations), Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (236 citations), Developmental Biology (16 citations) and Ophthalmology (65 citations). Michael S. Loop has collaborated with scholars based in United States and Russia. Frequent co-authors include Leonard Kass, Peter H. Hartline, S. Murray Sherman, Dolores M. Schroeder, Steven H. Schwartz, Mark A. Berkley, C. Leigh Millican, Douglas C. Smith, Laura L. Bruce and Zijiang J. He. Their work appears in journals such as Vision Research, Visual Neuroscience, The Journal of Comparative Neurology, Behavioural Brain Research and 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