Theo Bothma

1.0k citations
94 papers · 725 · h-index 15

Impact in

Papers in

Theo Bothma

82 papers receiving 612 citations

Peers

Theo Bothma
Comparison fields: 5 of 92
  • Library and Information Sciences 125
  • Language and Linguistics 189
  • Information Systems 195
  • Communication 51
  • Information Systems and Management 50
Replace Tom Dobrowolski with:
Tom Dobrowolski United Kingdom
Barbara H. Kwaśnik United States
Clare Beghtol Canada
Lyn Pemberton United Kingdom
Hanne Albrechtsen United States
Jeffrey Pomerantz United States
Ali Shiri Canada
Alison Pickard United Kingdom
Matthew Kirschenbaum United States
Mary Niles Maack United States
Theo Bothma relative to Tom Dobrowolski United Kingdom Tom Dobrowolski's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×4×6×8×9.9×
Tom Dobrowolski · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Theo Bothma

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Theo Bothma

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 94 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 200779
2 201228
3 198127
4 201225
5 201823
6 200323
7 201722
8 198121
9 200620
10 200717
11 201217
12 201216
13 201816
14 201314
15 201214
16 200514
17
Interactive, dynamic electronic dictionaries for text production
201113
18 200413
19
An Assessment of the Changing Needs of Information Professionals in Zimbabwe
201412
20 200712

About Theo Bothma

Theo Bothma is a scholar working on Information Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Language and Linguistics, Developmental and Educational Psychology and Library and Information Sciences, having authored 94 papers that have together received 725 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Lexicography and Language Studies (20 papers), Natural Language Processing Techniques (16 papers), Library Science and Information Literacy (11 papers), Semantic Web and Ontologies (8 papers), linguistics and terminology studies (8 papers), Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods (8 papers), Library Science and Administration (7 papers) and Online and Blended Learning (6 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Library and Information Sciences (125 citations), Language and Linguistics (189 citations), Information Systems (195 citations), Communication (51 citations) and Information Systems and Management (50 citations). Theo Bothma has collaborated with scholars based in South Africa, Denmark and Germany. Frequent co-authors include Dennis N. Ocholla, Ina Fourie, Henning Bergenholtz, Ulrich Heid, D.J. Prinsloo, Rufus H. Gouws, David Bradley, J. N. COETZEE, Sven Tarp and R. W. Hedges. Their work appears in journals such as Library Hi Tech, Microbiology, Libri, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science and Library Management.

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