Metacognition and Learning

409 papers and 15.6k indexed citations i.

About

The 409 papers published in Metacognition and Learning in the last decades have received a total of 15.6k indexed citations. Papers published in Metacognition and Learning usually cover Developmental and Educational Psychology (327 papers), Education (153 papers) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (111 papers) specifically the topics of Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods (238 papers), Educational Strategies and Epistemologies (153 papers) and Memory Processes and Influences (89 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Metacognition and Learning are Marcel V. J. Veenman, Roger Azevedo, Charlotte Dignath, Gerhard Büttner, Gregory Schraw, Peter Afflerbach, B.H.A.M. van Hout‐Wolters, Christopher A. Wolters, Carlo Magno and Stephanie Pieschl.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Metacognition and Learning

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Metacognition and Learning. 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 Metacognition and Learning.

Countries where authors publish in Metacognition and Learning

Since Specialization
Citations

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

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025