Po-Hsi Chen

10 papers receiving 331 citations

Peers

Po-Hsi Chen
Comparison fields: 5 of 89
  • Management Science and Operations Research 97
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology 86
  • Computer Science Applications 29
  • Education 125
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 54
Replace Peter W. van Rijn with:
Peter W. van Rijn United States
Peida Zhan China
Stephen Humphry Australia
Cynthia G. Parshall United States
Frederick Cline United States
Alan Huebner United States
April L. Zenisky United States
Louis V. DiBello United States
Dongbo Tu China
Gautam Puhan United States
Po-Hsi Chen relative to Peter W. van Rijn United States Peter W. van Rijn's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.7×
Peter W. van Rijn · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Po-Hsi Chen

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Po-Hsi Chen

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Po-Hsi Chen. 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 Po-Hsi Chen. The network helps show where Po-Hsi Chen may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 18 scholars most cited alongside Po-Hsi Chen, 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 Po-Hsi Chen Line = papers co-authored together Po-Hsi Chen links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

10 of 10 papers shown
#Work
1 2004116
2 201955
3 202149
4 201741
5 201325
6 201224
7 201515
8 201213
9 201910
10 20209

About Po-Hsi Chen

Po-Hsi Chen is a scholar working on Developmental and Educational Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Computer Networks and Communications, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Education, having authored 10 papers that have together received 357 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Psychometric Methodologies and Testing (3 papers), Education and Critical Thinking Development (2 papers), Educational Games and Gamification (2 papers), Advanced Statistical Modeling Techniques (2 papers), Behavioral and Psychological Studies (1 paper), Advanced Text Analysis Techniques (1 paper), Heavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity (1 paper) and Mental Health Research Topics (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Management Science and Operations Research (97 citations), Developmental and Educational Psychology (86 citations), Computer Science Applications (29 citations), Education (125 citations) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (54 citations). Po-Hsi Chen has collaborated with scholars based in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Thailand. Frequent co-authors include Wen‐Chung Wang, Ying‐Yao Cheng, Jon‐Chao Hong, Hsien-Sheng Hsiao, Chi-Ruei Tsai, Kai‐Hsin Tai, Hsueh‐Chih Chen, Jirarat Sitthiworachart, Hsien‐Sheng Hsiao and Sherry Y. Chen. Their work appears in journals such as Computers & Education, Applied Psychological Measurement, Chemosphere, Psychological Methods and BMC Pediatrics.

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