Natalie Wright

39 papers receiving 522 citations

Peers

Natalie Wright
Comparison fields: 5 of 107
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 112
  • Computer Science Applications 40
  • Health 37
  • Education 128
  • Visual Arts and Performing Arts 20
Replace Meltem Alemdar with:
Meltem Alemdar United States
Laura Hirsto Finland
Tiiu Poldma Canada
James Luther Adams United States
Klas Karlgren Sweden
Kristina Niedderer United Kingdom
Wesley Imms Australia
Hua Dong United Kingdom
Richard D. Parsons United States
Michael D. Wolcott United States
Natalie Wright relative to Meltem Alemdar United States Meltem Alemdar's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.8×
Meltem Alemdar · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Natalie Wright

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Natalie Wright

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 45 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2020143
2 201888
3 201763
4 201937
5 202034
6 202032
7 202116
8 201815
9 202211
10 201311
11 202010
12 20139
13
Educating the creative citizen. Design education programs in the knowledge economy
20148
14 20228
15 20147
16 20007
17
Knowledge economy market development mapping study
20135
18 19695
19 20215
20 20145

About Natalie Wright

Natalie Wright is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Mechanical Engineering, Education, Clinical Psychology and Management of Technology and Innovation, having authored 45 papers that have together received 554 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Creativity in Education and Neuroscience (13 papers), Design Education and Practice (11 papers), Biomedical and Engineering Education (3 papers), Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences (2 papers), Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion (2 papers), COVID-19 and Mental Health (2 papers), Engineering Education and Curriculum Development (2 papers) and Disaster Response and Management (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (112 citations), Computer Science Applications (40 citations), Health (37 citations), Education (128 citations) and Visual Arts and Performing Arts (20 citations). Natalie Wright has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Cara Wrigley, Byron Creese, Les Dawes, Zunera Khan, Ingelin Testad, Miguel Vasconcelos Da Silva, Siobhan O’Dwyer, Anne Corbett, Clive Ballard and Dag Aarsland. Their work appears in journals such as International Journal of Technology and Design Education, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, Emergency Medicine Journal, Thinking Skills and Creativity and Veterinary Record.

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