Countries where authors publish in Reflective Practice
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Reflective Practice. 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 Reflective Practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Reflective Practice more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Reflective Practice. 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 Reflective Practice.
About Reflective Practice
The 1.3k papers published in Reflective Practice in the last decades have received a total of 19.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Reflective Practice usually cover Human Factors and Ergonomics (138 papers), Research and Theory (38 papers), Education (952 papers), Public Administration (58 papers) and Developmental and Educational Psychology (188 papers) specifically the topics of Reflective Practices in Education (725 papers), Teacher Education and Leadership Studies (348 papers), Innovative Education and Learning Practices (138 papers), Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion (111 papers), Education and Critical Thinking Development (98 papers), Innovations in Medical Education (94 papers), Evaluation of Teaching Practices (94 papers) and Adult and Continuing Education Topics (79 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Reflective Practice are Barbara Larrivee, Catherine Beauchamp, Karran Thorpe, Tom Russell, Margaretha Ekebergh, Werner Ulrich, Neil Thompson, Jan Pascal, Valerie Hobbs and Helen Hickson.
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.