Countries where authors publish in Assessing Writing
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Assessing Writing. 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 papers published in Assessing Writing with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Assessing Writing more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Assessing Writing. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Assessing Writing.
About Assessing Writing
The 683 papers published in Assessing Writing in the last decades have received a total of 17.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Assessing Writing usually cover Literature and Literary Theory (255 papers), Developmental and Educational Psychology (256 papers), Language and Linguistics (228 papers), Education (475 papers) and Health Informatics (6 papers) specifically the topics of Student Assessment and Feedback (306 papers), EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning (226 papers), Discourse Analysis in Language Studies (194 papers), Writing and Handwriting Education (189 papers), Reflective Practices in Education (104 papers), Second Language Acquisition and Learning (96 papers), Second Language Learning and Teaching (75 papers) and Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods (70 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Assessing Writing are Jessie S. Barrot, Zhe Zhang, Lia Plakans, Sara Cushing Weigle, Icy Lee, Ken Hyland, Shulin Yu, Ute Knoch, Svetlana Koltovskaia and Atta Gebril.
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.