Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q1
WOS
Q1
Impact factor
4.5
SJR
1.437
CiteScore
12.2
Categories
Applied Psychology
Human-Computer Interaction
Areas
Computer Science
Psychology
Years of issue
1985-1987, 1989-2024
journal names
Human-Computer Interaction
HUM-COMPUT INTER-US
Top-3 citing journals

Lecture Notes in Computer Science
(1939 citations)

International Journal of Human Computer Studies
(591 citations)

Human-Computer Interaction
(538 citations)
Top-3 organizations

Carnegie Mellon University
(29 publications)

University of Michigan
(17 publications)

University of York
(13 publications)

University of Turin
(5 publications)

Delft University of Technology
(4 publications)

Umeå University
(4 publications)
Top-3 countries
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 277
Q1

Exploring the complexities of thesis writing in the distance mode: postgraduate students’ perspectives, challenges and strategies
Yunus M., Bachtiar B.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to explore the complexities faced by postgraduate students at Universitas Terbuka (UT) during their thesis writing process in a distance learning environment, focusing on their perspectives, challenges and strategies.Design/methodology/approachThe research employed a mixed-methods approach with a convergent parallel design, incorporating both quantitative data from 146 online questionnaire responses and qualitative insights from semi-structured interviews with 16 students. This comprehensive methodology enabled a detailed examination of the students' experiences. The participants were from seven study programs in the Postgraduate Schools of UT.FindingsThe study identifies key themes impacting thesis writing in a distance learning context, including self-discipline, time management, access to resources, technological adaptation, feelings of isolation, motivation and supervisory interaction. The findings highlight the critical role of structured support systems, technological infrastructure and adaptive strategies such as online study groups and productivity tools in mitigating these challenges. Regular, constructive feedback from supervisors and the establishment of a supportive academic community are crucial for student success.Research limitations/implicationsThe research emphasizes the need for educational institutions to enhance their digital platforms and provide comprehensive training to bridge the gap in resource accessibility and technological proficiency. Further studies could expand on the specific needs of different demographic groups within the distance learning framework.Practical implicationsInstitutions should implement targeted interventions such as time management workshops, regular mentoring sessions, and the development of interactive and collaborative online platforms to support distance learners effectively.Social implicationsBy addressing the unique challenges of thesis writing in distance education, this study contributes to improving academic outcomes and enhancing the overall learning experience for postgraduate students, fostering a more inclusive and supportive educational environment.Originality/valueThis research provides valuable insights into the specific experiences of postgraduate students at UT, offering actionable recommendations for educators and policymakers to support thesis writing in distance learning contexts.
Q1

The antecedents of online teaching anxiety among university lecturers in Thailand: a mixed-methods investigation
Aba Shaar M.Y., Waluyo B., Rofiah N.L., Singhasuwan P., Tongumpa K.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2025
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThe study examined the antecedents of lecturers' online teaching anxiety and analyzed their relationships with variables such as gender, age, education, teaching experience and faculty.Design/methodology/approachUsing a mixed-methods design, the study involved 115 university lecturers through surveys and 15 through semi-structured interviews, with data analyzed via mixed-methods approaches.FindingsPersonal matters and digital literacy caused the lowest anxiety, teaching methods and classroom management triggered moderate anxiety, and teaching context and health factors provoked the highest. Female lecturers experienced greater health-related anxiety due to prolonged screen time. Education lecturers reported lower anxiety than science lecturers, whose laboratory-based content was harder to adapt to online teaching.Originality/valueLecturers' online teaching anxiety stemmed from six factors: digital literacy, teaching context, teaching methods, class management, health and personal matters. Institutional and social support have been identified as crucial for improving well-being and reducing anxiety.
Q1

The nexus between teacher trainees’ digital literacy and online learning motivation
Ahmed M.M., Sultana M., Md. Rokonuzzaman, Hossain M.K.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study examined the relationship between levels of digital literacy and the online learning motivation (OLM) of teacher trainees across various factors.Design/methodology/approachThis investigation utilized a quantitative research approach. The sample was selected through a purposive method and consisted of 485 teacher trainees from the School of Education at Bangladesh Open University (BOU). Participants' digital literacy and OLM were assessed using validated five-point Likert scale questionnaires, consisting of 17 items for digital literacy and six items for OLM. The collection of data was conducted via a cross-sectional survey. Descriptive analysis, Cronbach’s alpha, exploratory factor analysis, t-test and ANOVA were employed for the purpose of data analysis.FindingsThe findings demonstrated that teacher trainees possessed sufficient digital literacy and OLM concerning the specified variables. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between digital literacy and OLM. BOU can evaluate all of these findings to make a rational decision regarding the development of its teacher education programs.Originality/valueThis exploratory study has yielded significant insights into the demographic characteristics, computer and internet skills, virtual learning skills and OLM of teacher trainees, thereby enhancing the existing body of knowledge in this field.
Q1

The efficacy of Telegram Messenger as a tool for enhancing argumentative writing among students in open and distance learning
Md Yusof N., Abdullah A.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis paper explores the effectiveness of using Telegram Messenger as a tool to enhance argumentative writing skills among open and distance learning (ODL) students. The paper outlines that argumentative writing is a crucial skill, particularly in written discourse, and that teaching it to ODL students presents unique challenges compared to traditional classroom settings.Design/methodology/approachThis quasi-experimental study was conducted on first-year ODL students in a Malaysian tertiary institution to measure the effectiveness of using Telegram Messenger to improve argumentative writing skills. The study used convenient sampling, with pre- and post-tests administered to both control and experimental groups, and the results were analyzed using paired sample t-tests. Additionally, qualitative data were gathered from six selected students, ensuring rigorous analysis and elimination of confounding variables by assigning the same writing tasks to all participants.FindingsThe findings of this paper suggest that students in the experimental group showed significant improvement in their argumentative writing skills, as evidenced by higher post-test scores compared to the control group. Qualitative feedback from selected students indicated that Telegram Messenger encouraged participation and made the writing process more engaging and interactive.Research limitations/implicationsThe study involved a relatively small sample size of 60 students from two cases and lasted only 10 weeks. Thus, the findings might not be generalizable to all ODL students. A longer study duration will provide findings on the long-term effects of using Telegram Messenger on argumentative writing skills. Factors such as age, educational background, language proficiency and prior experience in online learning could yield different results.Practical implicationsFor educators and institutions involved in online education, this research highlights the potential of integrating digital platforms like Telegram Messenger into their teaching strategies to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes, particularly in areas such as writing skills development. It also underscores the importance of adapting teaching methods to suit the unique needs and challenges of ODL students. Moreover, incorporating Telegram in ODL writing classrooms can foster a dynamic, interactive environment that supports both individual and collaborative learning.Social implicationsODL has become increasingly popular, especially with the rise of digital communication platforms. This study delves into how such platforms, like Telegram Messenger, can be utilized to enhance the learning experience for ODL students. By leveraging technology, educational opportunities can potentially be extended to individuals who may not have access to traditional classroom settings due to geographical, financial or other constraints.Originality/valueThe originality and value of this study lie in its focus on using Telegram Messenger, a widely accessible and familiar digital platform, to address the unique challenges ODL students face in developing argumentative writing skills in ODL. By employing a quasi-experimental design with both quantitative and qualitative analyses, the study provides robust evidence of Telegram’s effectiveness as a tool to improve engagement and writing outcomes, distinguishing it from traditional methods and other digital platforms that may lack the immediacy or interactivity Telegram offers.
Q1

Breaking the isolation: how influential is co-creation in open and distance learning on the use of new media?
Chakravarty R., Baruah A., Sarma N.N.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeIn the open and distance learning (ODL) system, widely scattered learners across various age groups often feel isolated. New-age media-enabled co-creation can help reduce this isolation. However, fostering collaborative academic engagement to break this isolation presents challenges for ODL institutions. Therefore, understanding the perceptions of the ODL teachers and learners on this issue is essential.Design/methodology/approachThe study adopted the triangulation method, collecting primary data from 198 learners at Krishna Kanta Handiqui State Open University (KKHSOU). A focus group discussion with members of the academic staff provided qualitative insights. The instrument consisted of 23 statement items and was statistically analyzed using factor analysis, one-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests with SPSS version 26.0.FindingsCollaborative academic engagements were found to be significantly influenced by differences in the perceptions of learners across age groups towards the academic delivery process and new-age media platforms. Various dimensions like learner genuineness and effectiveness of support services also have implications for reducing isolation.Originality/valueThis study opens new avenues in the literature on co-creation and new-age media platforms in the context of ODL. This provides useful insights to educators on breaking isolation among the learners and involves them in the academic processes. The human approach as always will remain enduring.
Q1

Research on the transmission of the Open University of Japan courses via multi-device apps oriented to the learning ecosystem
Kodama H., Suzuki M.T., Yaginuma Y.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to propose the need for an integrated system for the production, authoring, addition and revision of webcast content and a multi-device apps mechanism with rights management for Internet transmission in the perspective of the OUJ course reuse.Design/methodology/approachThis paper designs systems that reuse the existing OUJ courses from the viewpoint of effective utilization, combine broadcasting lectures and online lectures of the OUJ courses and seamlessly link them as media-mix contents. In contrast to content development methodologies that assume embedded content production, this paper’s methodology takes an approach to producing and authoring webcasting content, flexibly adding and revising the content and transmitting that content over the internet via multi-device apps, taking rights management into account.FindingsThere is concern about the ELSI arising from the use of generative AI. It is directed at web content. This paper can contribute to resolving the ELSI surrounding the use of generative AI because it discusses a method of learning content development that clarifies the attribution of rights to content.Originality/valueThe originality of this paper lies in the fact that it is oriented to reuse existing lectures of the OUJ courses and simplify the rights clearance for them, from the perspective of the learning ecosystem. The value of this paper is that it can also serve as a technical and legal response to the production, authoring and Internet transmission of open university courses in the era of generative AI.
Q1

Advancing open education through open-source software: examining UTAUT 2 factors in adoption and implementation
Duan C.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 1
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to examine the factors influencing university students' adoption of open-source software (OSS) within the context of open educational practices (OEP) by applying an extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT 2) model.Design/methodology/approachThe research employs a quantitative approach, gathering data from 156 students at Hong Kong Metropolitan University through an online survey. The survey was designed to test nine hypotheses derived from the UTAUT 2 model, incorporating additional constructs relevant to OSS. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to analyse the data and test the relationships between constructs.FindingsThe results indicate that Performance Expectancy (PE), Effort Expectancy (EE), Price Value (PV), Self-Efficacy (SE) and Value Alignment (VA) significantly influence students' Behavioral Intention (BI) to adopt OSS. Conversely, Social Influence (SI), Facilitating Conditions (FC), Hedonic Motivation (HM) and Habit (HT) were not significant predictors. The findings suggest that while UTAUT 2 provides a useful framework for understanding OSS adoption, it requires adaptation to fully capture the unique characteristics of OSS in educational settings.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature by extending the UTAUT 2 model to the context of OSS adoption in higher education, highlighting the importance of economic factors and user alignment with OSS values. The results offer practical insights for higher education institutions aiming to promote OSS, emphasizing the need for support structures, training, and the promotion of OSS’s economic and collaborative benefits.
Q1

Resisting technological solutionism in open universities in the time of global digital convergence
Lim D.C., Mat H., Yusooff F.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis purpose of this paper is to explore the future of open universities (OUs), particularly in developing Asia, focusing on the potential risks associated with technological solutionism, or the popular belief that educational problems can be readily solved through technological means. This exploration is pertinent as the initial advantages that OUs once held have significantly diminished and competing higher education institutions worldwide are converging on a digital future.Design/methodology/approachThe qualitative method of empathy-based stories (MEBS) was employed as the primary research method for drawing data from sampled OU teachers. The obtained data were parsed via textual analysis and the lens of critical discourses on technology and higher education.FindingsThe study shows that, in the future envisioned by the sampled OU teachers, students’ lack of privileged access to frontier technologies is no barrier to learning success. It also emphasises that learning outcomes have causality beyond technological determinism, and that educational problems, which OUs may deem as requiring technological solutions, are often non-technological in nature and require no technological fixes.Originality/valueCritiques of techno-solutionism, such as the present study, are virtually absent in the context of OUs in developing Asia. For this very reason, this study is vital and serves as a guardrail while these OUs seek to reformulate their respective value propositions in the time of global digital convergence.
Q1

Societal bonds in virtual spaces: exploring the sense of community in online student communities at Anadolu University’s Open Education System
Uçar M., Güler E., Koçdar S.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to investigate the levels of the sense of community among students enrolled in online student communities at Anadolu University Open Education System (OES), as well as their motivations for joining these communities and their expectations.Design/methodology/approachAn explanatory sequential design incorporating mixed research methods was employed as the research framework for this study. Quantitative data were collected from 1,065 students enrolled in online student communities during the 2021–2022 academic year, while qualitative data were obtained from 14 students after the survey using an extreme case sampling method. The quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance tests, correlation analysis and regression analysis. The qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis.FindingsThe study results indicate that students enrolled in online student communities generally have higher levels of a sense of community. These levels did not significantly differ based on gender, employment status, entry type to the university, program studied or membership status in more than one community. However, significant differences were observed in terms of age, time spent in communities and meeting attendance. Additionally, students' perceptions of social presence had a significant effect on their sense of community.Originality/valueThis study is the first to investigate the sense of community in online student communities at Anadolu University's OES.
Q1

Demystifying the way libraries support distance learning: a bibliometric analysis of scholarly communication in distance libraries
Papachristopoulos L.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report on bibliometric research on the activities and services offered by distance libraries that serve distance learning institutions.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis of scholarly communication has always been a valuable tool for researchers and policymakers in order to understand trends, gaps and patterns in a specific field. In this paper, a bibliometric analysis has been applied based on a well-known bibliometric tool called “VOSviewer.” The articles that constitute the dataset of current research were drawn from two journals: the Journal of Library Administration and the Journal of Library and Information Services in Distance Learning.FindingsThe bibliometric analysis applied in distance libraries showed that the researchers in this domain are mainly introverts and need to prioritize engaging in the scientific research process over merely publishing good practices. Although there are a lot of libraries serving distance learning institutions (formal and non-formal), there is a notable lack of activity in the scientific publication field.Originality/valueDistance libraries have played a significant role in supporting distance learning, and since distance education has become more important in the educational ecosystem, the analysis of its scholarly production would provide administrators, researchers and policymakers with insights for the next era of conventional libraries.
Q1

Enhancing online learning: a systematic literature review exploring the impact of screencast feedback on student learning outcomes
Din Eak A., Annamalai N.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
Purpose This systematic literature review paper critically examines the effectiveness of screencast feedback compared with text feedback in promoting student learning outcomes in online higher education. This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding feedback modalities and their impact on online learning environments.Design/methodology/approach This paper adopts a systematic review approach to synthesise and analyse existing studies investigating the use of screencast feedback in online higher education settings. A comprehensive search and selection process was employed to identify relevant literature. The selected studies were then analysed for their methodologies, findings and implications. This paper seeks to provide an overview of the current state of research, highlighting the benefits, challenges and potential impacts of screencast feedback on student learning outcomes.Findings The findings of this paper suggest that while there is a positive perception of screencast feedback among students and instructors, drawing definitive conclusions about its superiority over text feedback remains at the very beginning. Students generally appreciate the personalised, supportive and engaging nature of screencast feedback, particularly within the online learning context. However, challenges such as technical barriers and potential workload implications for instructors are also noted. Further empirical research is needed to comprehensively evaluate the comparative efficacy of screencast feedback, considering factors like online engagement, digital literacy and the impact on diverse student populations.Research limitations/implications This review underscores the acute necessity for expansive and meticulously designed studies that can provide conclusive insights into the authentic potential of screencast feedback and its resonance within the unique landscape of online learning. Through rigorous inquiry, educators can discern the optimal strategies for harnessing the advantages of screencast feedback to enhance student learning outcomes, aligning harmoniously with the dynamics of virtual classrooms.Practical implications Screencast feedback emerges as a promising avenue to foster meaningful connections between instructors and learners. The review highlights that screencast feedback engenders a more dialogic interaction between lecturers and students, resulting in personalised, supportive and engaging feedback experiences.Social implications The systematic review conducted underscores the positive reception of screencast feedback from both students and lecturers in this context. The findings are consistent with the principles of social constructivist theory, suggesting that the interactive and personalised nature of screencast feedback facilitates a richer educational experience for students, even within the confines of virtual classrooms (Vygotsky, 1978).Originality/value This innovative blend of methodologies contributes new insights that can inform educational practices and pedagogical strategies in online learning environments.
Q1

A flipped classroom with whiteboard animation and modules to enhance students' self-regulation, critical thinking and communication skills: a conceptual framework and its implementation
Suwardika G., Sopandi A.T., Indrawan I.P., Masakazu K.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeIn the era of Industry 4.0, the relevance of webinar tutorials, a form of distance learning, is paramount. These tutorials can catalyze self-regulated learning, critical thinking and communication skills, especially for prospective and in-service teachers pursuing higher education. This paper aims to develop a conceptual framework and report the results of implementing a flipped classroom with whiteboard animation and modules. This innovative approach seeks to enhance students' self-regulation, critical thinking and communication abilities.Design/methodology/approachThis study employs a mixed-methods approach. In the first phase, a hypothetical model and conceptual framework for the Flipped Classroom with Whiteboard Animation and Modules were developed to enhance self-regulation, critical thinking and communication skills. The resulting conceptual framework was then implemented through a quasi-experiment using a non-equivalent control group design involving 83 elementary school teachers enrolled in the Elementary School Science Education course (PDGK4202), divided into three treatment groups. Qualitative data were collected through observations of the learning process, documentation of student worksheet completion and interviews with students. Questionnaires and tests were used as instruments for quantitative data collection. Qualitative data were analyzed using descriptive methods, while quantitative data were evaluated using MANCOVA.FindingsThe findings demonstrate significant improvements in students' self-regulation, critical thinking skills and communication abilities after implementing the Flipped Classroom with Whiteboard Animation and Modules.Research limitations/implicationsSome limitations in this study need to be recognized. These limitations include the specific sample type of elementary school teachers who went back to college to take science learning courses in elementary school. Teachers have various diversity that may affect the dependent variable, such as age, educational background, facilities, internet signal stability at their learning location and teaching experience. This study was conducted in a specific context (using the flipped classroom model at UT), so the results may need to be more generalizable to other educational contexts with different facilities, systems and policies. In addition, the measurement of self-regulation and communication skills, particularly with questionnaires, relies on self-report, which can be biased due to socially desirable responses or inaccurate self-assessment. Although the MANCOVA test showed significant results, it is possible that other variables not controlled for in this study (e.g. intrinsic motivation, social support from family or colleagues) also affected the independent variables.Practical implicationsThis study emphasizes the importance of adapting webinar tutorials for Industry 4.0 and enhancing self-regulated learning, critical thinking and communication skills, particularly for working students and teachers. It offers a practical framework for educators and suggests ways to improve online learning materials. The implementation results show significant skill enhancement. These findings have practical implications for educators, institutions and instructional designers, guiding the development of effective distance learning strategies and curriculum improvements in the digital age.Social implicationsThe social implications of this study are noteworthy. In the context of Industry 4.0, adapting webinar tutorials to promote self-regulated learning, critical thinking and communication skills is essential not only for the educational sector but also for the broader society. It equips prospective and in-service teachers, who are pivotal in shaping future generations, with the necessary skills to navigate a rapidly changing digital landscape. Furthermore, enhancing self-regulation and critical thinking abilities among employed students contributes to a more informed and adaptable workforce, fostering societal resilience in the face of technological advancements.Originality/valueThe uniqueness of this study stems from the creative modification of a webinar tutorial, which specifically targets the urgent requirement for enhancing abilities among teachers and university students. The conceptual framework serves as a valuable tool for educators, and the findings of this study confirm its effectiveness in enhancing self-regulation, critical thinking abilities and communication proficiency. Furthermore, the recommendations offered also furnish practical insights to improve this model.
Q1

Student experiences of agile-blended learning in emergency online education: insights from a participatory case study
Wong J.M.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 4
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study examined the implementation of an agile-blended learning (ABL) approach in a master-level early childhood research course and assessed its impact on the learning experience. The purpose was to understand how incorporating ABL concepts affected flexibility, learner autonomy, collaboration and technology mediation, the core principles of ABL.Design/methodology/approachA participatory case study methodology was employed to gather insights from 40 students regarding their experiences in the redesigned research course. Data were collected through interviews, observations and document analysis. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed and quantitative data descriptively analyzed.FindingsABL fostered flexibility, convenience and learner autonomy. However, students desired richer interpersonal interactions. Technological integration enhanced learning, but social presence was lacking.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was limited to a specific master-level early childhood education course and focused on a particular group of students. Further research is needed to examine the generalizability of the findings in different educational contexts and student populations.Practical implicationsRecommendations include ongoing professional development and support systems to optimize ABL realization. Sustaining ABL practices necessitates flexible, empowering institutional structures.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the literature by exploring the potential of ABL in the context of early childhood research education. It provides empirical evidence of the benefits of ABL for increased flexibility, learner autonomy, collaboration and technology mediation. The case study design adds to the originality by offering insights into the practical implementation of ABL in an educational setting.
Q1

Perceptions of students on artificial intelligence-generated content avatar utilization in learning management system
Tan S.F.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to explore students’ perceptions of the use of an artificial intelligence-generated content avatar (AIGC avatar) within a learning management system (LMS).Design/methodology/approachThis qualitative research involved seven postgraduate students. Data were collected through individual, in-depth interviews. The videos of the AIGC avatar, created using Leonardo, ChatGPT and Heygen, were uploaded to the LMS to communicate with students for the purposes of a welcome note, assignment guide, assignment feedback, tutorial reminders and preparation as well as to provide encouragement and study tips. Students were interviewed at the end of the semester.FindingsThe findings of this study indicated that the majority of participating students held positive perceptions regarding the use of the AIGC avatar in the LMS. They reported that it enhanced their perceived instructor’s social presence and motivation to learn. The assignment guide and feedback were particularly valued by the participants. While some students noted the AIGC avatar’s lack of naturalness, others appreciated the clear and professional speech it delivered.Research limitations/implicationsThe study was confined to seven students from a single course at one institution, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research could involve a larger and more diverse group of participants.Practical implicationsThe findings may offer education providers an alternative solution for engaging students in an LMS.Originality/valueThis study highlights the potential of AIGC avatars to replace text-based communication in LMS and enhance students’ perceived instructor social presence.
Q1

Measurement model of readiness for online testing of undergraduate students in Thailand’s distance education programs
Laosum T.
Q1
Asian Association of Open Universities Journal
,
2024
,
citations by CoLab: 0
,

Open Access
|
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to develop a model for readiness measurement and to study readiness levels for online testing of undergraduate students in Thailand’s distance education programs.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 870 undergraduate students enrolled in the 2022 academic year of a Thai university were sampled for the study. The samples were divided into two groups: Group 1 comprised 432 students who underwent exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Group 2 comprised 438 students who underwent second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Both were multi-stage random samples. Descriptive statistics, item-total correlations (ITCs), coefficient correlations, EFA and second-order CFA were used.FindingsThe readiness for the online testing model comprised 5 factors and 33 indicators. These included self-efficacy (SE) in utilizing technology (nine indicators), self-directed learning (SL) for readiness testing (six indicators), adequacy of technology (AT) for testing (five indicators), acceptance of online testing (AC) (seven indicators) and readiness training for testing (six indicators). The model was congruent with empirical data, and the survey results indicated that students were highly prepared at the “high” level.Practical implicationsThis study disclosed several factors and indicators involved in the readiness for online testing. The university may use these findings in preparing its students for online testing for better achievement.Originality/valueThese findings may serve as a framework for the analysis of the readiness issues for online testing of undergraduate students and also offer guidance to the universities preparing to offer online testing.
Top-100
Citing journals
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
|
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
1939 citations, 5.83%
|
|
International Journal of Human Computer Studies
591 citations, 1.78%
|
|
Human-Computer Interaction
538 citations, 1.62%
|
|
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
474 citations, 1.43%
|
|
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
396 citations, 1.19%
|
|
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
384 citations, 1.16%
|
|
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
375 citations, 1.13%
|
|
Interacting with Computers
361 citations, 1.09%
|
|
Computers in Human Behavior
342 citations, 1.03%
|
|
Computer Supported Cooperative Work
282 citations, 0.85%
|
|
Behaviour and Information Technology
244 citations, 0.73%
|
|
Human Factors
183 citations, 0.55%
|
|
International Journal of Social Robotics
151 citations, 0.45%
|
|
Ergonomics
127 citations, 0.38%
|
|
Pen-and-Paper User Interfaces
113 citations, 0.34%
|
|
SSRN Electronic Journal
104 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Communications in Computer and Information Science
103 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Applied Ergonomics
102 citations, 0.31%
|
|
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
101 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing
100 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Design Studies
93 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Journal of Systems and Software
91 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychology
90 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing
90 citations, 0.27%
|
|
Computers and Education
84 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Universal Access in the Information Society
82 citations, 0.25%
|
|
IEEE Access
79 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Cognitive Science
70 citations, 0.21%
|
|
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics
68 citations, 0.2%
|
|
ACM SIGCHI Bulletin
66 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
65 citations, 0.2%
|
|
PLoS ONE
58 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Sensors
57 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
56 citations, 0.17%
|
|
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
55 citations, 0.17%
|
|
IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology
55 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Communications of the ACM
53 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Information and Management
52 citations, 0.16%
|
|
The Enterprise Engineering Series
52 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Multimodal Technologies and Interaction
50 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Applied Sciences (Switzerland)
49 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Cognition, Technology and Work
47 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Multimedia Tools and Applications
47 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Decision Support Systems
47 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing
47 citations, 0.14%
|
|
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies
47 citations, 0.14%
|
|
ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction
45 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Interactions
44 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Cultures in Human-Computer Interaction
44 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making
43 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal of Educational Computing Research
43 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces
42 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Information and Software Technology
42 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Sustainability
42 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Information Systems Research
42 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science
41 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Small Group Research
40 citations, 0.12%
|
|
IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems
40 citations, 0.12%
|
|
AI and Society
38 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
37 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
37 citations, 0.11%
|
|
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
37 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Journal of Medical Internet Research
37 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering
36 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Communication Research
36 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Educational Technology Research and Development
36 citations, 0.11%
|
|
ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing
35 citations, 0.11%
|
|
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction
35 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Cognitive Systems Research
35 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Frontiers in Robotics and AI
35 citations, 0.11%
|
|
ACM Computing Surveys
34 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Acta Psychologica
34 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Organization Science
34 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Education and Information Technologies
34 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Knowledge-Based Systems
33 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Information Systems Journal
33 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Instructional Science
32 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Expert Systems with Applications
32 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
32 citations, 0.1%
|
|
IEEE Pervasive Computing
32 citations, 0.1%
|
|
Information Technology and People
31 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
30 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Journal of Visual Languages & Computing
29 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Information Processing and Management
28 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Procedia Computer Science
28 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
28 citations, 0.08%
|
|
International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction
27 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Behavior Research Methods
27 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Learning and Instruction
27 citations, 0.08%
|
|
International Journal of Information Management
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions Of the ASME
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
New Media and Society
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Virtual Reality
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
ACM Transactions on Information Systems
25 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
25 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Internet Research
24 citations, 0.07%
|
|
International Journal of Medical Informatics
23 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
23 citations, 0.07%
|
|
CoDesign
23 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
|
Citing publishers
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
5866 citations, 17.65%
|
|
Springer Nature
5694 citations, 17.13%
|
|
Elsevier
4160 citations, 12.51%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
3903 citations, 11.74%
|
|
Taylor & Francis
2773 citations, 8.34%
|
|
SAGE
1457 citations, 4.38%
|
|
Wiley
1164 citations, 3.5%
|
|
IGI Global
742 citations, 2.23%
|
|
MDPI
503 citations, 1.51%
|
|
Emerald
486 citations, 1.46%
|
|
Oxford University Press
473 citations, 1.42%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
419 citations, 1.26%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
302 citations, 0.91%
|
|
JMIR Publications
204 citations, 0.61%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
116 citations, 0.35%
|
|
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
102 citations, 0.31%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
100 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
98 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
79 citations, 0.24%
|
|
CAIRN
73 citations, 0.22%
|
|
World Scientific
57 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
44 citations, 0.13%
|
|
American Psychological Association (APA)
44 citations, 0.13%
|
|
ASME International
41 citations, 0.12%
|
|
John Benjamins Publishing Company
38 citations, 0.11%
|
|
MIT Press
36 citations, 0.11%
|
|
OpenEdition
35 citations, 0.11%
|
|
IOP Publishing
32 citations, 0.1%
|
|
IOS Press
31 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Annual Reviews
31 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Hogrefe Publishing Group
30 citations, 0.09%
|
|
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
27 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Academy of Management
26 citations, 0.08%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
24 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
24 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Trans Tech Publications
23 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
21 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
19 citations, 0.06%
|
|
The Ergonomics Society of Korea
17 citations, 0.05%
|
|
SPIE-Intl Soc Optical Eng
15 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
14 citations, 0.04%
|
|
BMJ
14 citations, 0.04%
|
|
PeerJ
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Robotics Society of Japan
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Intellect
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Japan Society for Fuzzy Theory and Intelligent Informatics
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
EDP Sciences
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Royal Society
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Morgan & Claypool Publishers
9 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Fuji Technology Press
9 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Foundation for the Blind
9 citations, 0.03%
|
|
SAE International
9 citations, 0.03%
|
|
The Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence
9 citations, 0.03%
|
|
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET)
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Consortium Erudit
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
IntechOpen
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
SciELO
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Ubiquity Press
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
AIP Publishing
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Accounting Association
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Speech Language Hearing Association
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Verlag Hans Huber AG
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Dental Education Association
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Marketing Association
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Brill
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
University of Illinois Press
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Physical Society (APS)
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Tsinghua University Press
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Institute of Electronics, Information and Communications Engineers (IEICE)
5 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Johann Ambrosius Barth
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
N T C Publications Ltd.
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
S. Karger AG
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Communication and Social Robotics Labs
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Japan Society of Kansei Engineering
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Editora Edgard Blucher, Ltda.
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Cogitatio
4 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Society for Judgment and Decision Making
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Tongji University Press
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
American Medical Association (AMA)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
LLC CPC Business Perspectives
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Mark Allen Group
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Science Alert
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Inderscience Publishers
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
International Academy Publishing (IAP)
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium Advisory Board
3 citations, 0.01%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
|
Publishing organizations
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
|
Carnegie Mellon University
29 publications, 4.92%
|
|
University of Michigan
17 publications, 2.88%
|
|
University of York
13 publications, 2.2%
|
|
University of California, Irvine
12 publications, 2.03%
|
|
University College London
11 publications, 1.86%
|
|
Stanford University
11 publications, 1.86%
|
|
University of Washington
11 publications, 1.86%
|
|
University of Colorado Boulder
11 publications, 1.86%
|
|
University of Toronto
10 publications, 1.69%
|
|
Eindhoven University of Technology
9 publications, 1.53%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
9 publications, 1.53%
|
|
Aarhus University
9 publications, 1.53%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
9 publications, 1.53%
|
|
Georgia Institute of technology
7 publications, 1.19%
|
|
Lancaster University
7 publications, 1.19%
|
|
Indiana University Bloomington
7 publications, 1.19%
|
|
Umeå University
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Delft University of Technology
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
University of Turin
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
University of Nottingham
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Hanyang University
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Virginia Tech
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
University of California, San Diego
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
Cardiff University
6 publications, 1.02%
|
|
IT University of Copenhagen
5 publications, 0.85%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
5 publications, 0.85%
|
|
University of British Columbia
5 publications, 0.85%
|
|
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Haifa
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Stockholm University
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
William Marsh Rice University
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Cornell University
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of California, Santa Cruz
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Siegen
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Northumbria University
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
Sheffield Hallam University
4 publications, 0.68%
|
|
University of Twente
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Aalto University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Dundee
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
King's College London
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Edinburgh
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Yale University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Glasgow
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Canterbury
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Melbourne
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Sungkyunkwan University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Clemson University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
George Mason University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Simon Fraser University
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Sheffield
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Royal Philips
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of Calgary
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University of New Hampshire
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University College Dublin
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
University College Cork (National University of Ireland, Cork)
3 publications, 0.51%
|
|
Zhejiang University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Radboud University Nijmegen
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
KTH Royal Institute of Technology
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Reichman University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of New South Wales
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Technology Sydney
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Milan
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Oulu
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Aalborg University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Oxford
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Cambridge
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Drexel University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Loughborough University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Sydney
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Strathclyde
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Boston University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Princeton University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Dalhousie University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
New York University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Tufts University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of California, Davis
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
DePaul University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Newcastle University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Northeastern University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Central Florida
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Dublin City University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Bristol
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Swansea University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Waterloo
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Technical University of Darmstadt
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Minnesota
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Purdue University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Leeds
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Salzburg
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Fordham University
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Manitoba
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Saskatchewan
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
University of Guelph
2 publications, 0.34%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
5
10
15
20
25
30
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
1
2
3
4
5
|
|
University of Turin
5 publications, 4.39%
|
|
Umeå University
4 publications, 3.51%
|
|
Delft University of Technology
4 publications, 3.51%
|
|
Hanyang University
4 publications, 3.51%
|
|
Lancaster University
4 publications, 3.51%
|
|
Northumbria University
4 publications, 3.51%
|
|
Stockholm University
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
Eindhoven University of Technology
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
University College London
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
University of Nottingham
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
Carnegie Mellon University
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
Pennsylvania State University
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
University of Siegen
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
University College Dublin
3 publications, 2.63%
|
|
Zhejiang University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
KTH Royal Institute of Technology
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Reichman University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Milan
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
IT University of Copenhagen
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of Edinburgh
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Georgia Institute of technology
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Sungkyunkwan University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Virginia Tech
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of California, Santa Cruz
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of Central Florida
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Swansea University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Simon Fraser University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of British Columbia
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Sheffield Hallam University
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of Toronto
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
University of New Hampshire
2 publications, 1.75%
|
|
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Cyprus
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Bar-Ilan University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Twente
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Technical University of Munich
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Radboud University Nijmegen
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Bordeaux
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Bayreuth
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Nanjing University of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Southeast University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Helsinki
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
ETH Zurich
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Zurich
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Australian National University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Bologna
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Milano-Bicocca
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Nanyang Technological University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Imperial College London
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Dundee
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Cambridge
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Aarhus University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Bergen
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Padua
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Nottingham Trent University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Queensland University of Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Cornell University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Birmingham
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Pisa
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Eastern Piedmont Amadeo Avogadro
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Institute for High Performance Computing and Networking
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Monash University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of the Sunshine Coast
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Dalhousie University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Arizona State University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Clemson University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Hong Kong Baptist University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Colorado State University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Harvard University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Washington
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Tufts University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
San Francisco State University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
DePaul University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of California, Irvine
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Nottingham Ningbo China
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Newcastle University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Texas at Austin
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Dublin City University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Trinity College Dublin
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Bristol
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Michigan
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Université de Sherbrooke
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Dartmouth College
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Technical University of Braunschweig
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Minnesota
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Applied Sciences Utrecht
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Tilburg University
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
University of Passau
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Ilmenau University of Technology
1 publication, 0.88%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1
2
3
4
5
|
Publishing countries
50
100
150
200
250
|
|
USA
|
USA, 238, 40.34%
USA
238 publications, 40.34%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 94, 15.93%
United Kingdom
94 publications, 15.93%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 36, 6.1%
Canada
36 publications, 6.1%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 26, 4.41%
Denmark
26 publications, 4.41%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 22, 3.73%
Netherlands
22 publications, 3.73%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 21, 3.56%
Germany
21 publications, 3.56%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 18, 3.05%
Italy
18 publications, 3.05%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 17, 2.88%
Australia
17 publications, 2.88%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 14, 2.37%
Republic of Korea
14 publications, 2.37%
|
France
|
France, 13, 2.2%
France
13 publications, 2.2%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 12, 2.03%
Sweden
12 publications, 2.03%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 11, 1.86%
Israel
11 publications, 1.86%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 11, 1.86%
Finland
11 publications, 1.86%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 10, 1.69%
Ireland
10 publications, 1.69%
|
China
|
China, 7, 1.19%
China
7 publications, 1.19%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 7, 1.19%
Austria
7 publications, 1.19%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 6, 1.02%
Norway
6 publications, 1.02%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 5, 0.85%
Spain
5 publications, 0.85%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 5, 0.85%
New Zealand
5 publications, 0.85%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 5, 0.85%
Japan
5 publications, 0.85%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 4, 0.68%
Switzerland
4 publications, 0.68%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 2, 0.34%
Greece
2 publications, 0.34%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 2, 0.34%
Turkey
2 publications, 0.34%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.17%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 1, 0.17%
Portugal
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 1, 0.17%
Algeria
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 1, 0.17%
Argentina
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 1, 0.17%
Brazil
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Georgia
|
Georgia, 1, 0.17%
Georgia
1 publication, 0.17%
|
India
|
India, 1, 0.17%
India
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 1, 0.17%
Cyprus
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 1, 0.17%
Mexico
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 1, 0.17%
Singapore
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Croatia
|
Croatia, 1, 0.17%
Croatia
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 1, 0.17%
Chile
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Ethiopia
|
Ethiopia, 1, 0.17%
Ethiopia
1 publication, 0.17%
|
Show all (6 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
|
|
USA
|
USA, 32, 28.07%
USA
32 publications, 28.07%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 23, 20.18%
United Kingdom
23 publications, 20.18%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 12, 10.53%
Italy
12 publications, 10.53%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 9, 7.89%
Germany
9 publications, 7.89%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 9, 7.89%
Netherlands
9 publications, 7.89%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 8, 7.02%
Canada
8 publications, 7.02%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 8, 7.02%
Sweden
8 publications, 7.02%
|
China
|
China, 6, 5.26%
China
6 publications, 5.26%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 6, 5.26%
Denmark
6 publications, 5.26%
|
France
|
France, 4, 3.51%
France
4 publications, 3.51%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 4, 3.51%
Australia
4 publications, 3.51%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 4, 3.51%
Ireland
4 publications, 3.51%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 4, 3.51%
Republic of Korea
4 publications, 3.51%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 3, 2.63%
Austria
3 publications, 2.63%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 3, 2.63%
Israel
3 publications, 2.63%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 2, 1.75%
Norway
2 publications, 1.75%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 2, 1.75%
Finland
2 publications, 1.75%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 2, 1.75%
Switzerland
2 publications, 1.75%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.88%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 1, 0.88%
Portugal
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 1, 0.88%
Algeria
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 1, 0.88%
Argentina
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 1, 0.88%
Brazil
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 1, 0.88%
Spain
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 1, 0.88%
Cyprus
1 publication, 0.88%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 1, 0.88%
Singapore
1 publication, 0.88%
|
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
|
2 profile journal articles
Kostakos Vassilis

University of Melbourne
272 publications,
5 949 citations
h-index: 39
1 profile journal article
Santoro Carmen
101 publications,
1 830 citations
h-index: 21
1 profile journal article
Jamet Eric
81 publications,
1 702 citations
h-index: 18