Adam Leite
- Philosophy top 1%
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology top 10%
- Cognitive Neuroscience top 10%
- Sociology and Political Science
- Social Psychology
- Co-authors
- Kate AbramsonAndrew ReisnerMark SchroederAlan MillarAsbjørn Steglich‐PetersenRalph WedgwoodNishi ShahDuncan Pritchard
- Topics
- Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (24 papers)Philosophy and Theoretical Science (14 papers)Theology and Philosophy of Evil (5 papers)
- Journals
- Philosophy and Phenomenological ResearchJournal of Personality DisordersThe Philosophical Quarterly
- Partner nations
- United StatesUnited KingdomCanada
In The Last Decade
Adam Leite
24 papers receiving 233 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 35
- Philosophy 226
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 129
- Cognitive Neuroscience 105
- Sociology and Political Science 56
- Social Psychology 27
Countries citing papers authored by Adam Leite
This map shows the geographic impact of Adam Leite'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 Adam Leite with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Adam Leite more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Adam Leite
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Adam Leite. 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 Adam Leite. The network helps show where Adam Leite may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Adam Leite
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Adam Leite. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Adam Leite based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Adam Leite. Adam Leite is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 1 | |
| 3 | 1 | |
| 4 | 0 | |
| 5 | 0 | |
| 6 | 3 | |
| 7 | 11 | |
| 8 | 3 | |
| 9 | Standing beliefs, skepticism, and some questions about Zalabardo's probabilistic approach | 1 |
| 10 | 12 | |
| 11 | 8 | |
| 12 | 8 | |
| 13 | 38 | |
| 14 | 36 | |
| 15 | 5 | |
| 16 | 13 | |
| 17 | 3 | |
| 18 | 5 | |
| 19 | Skepticism, sensitivity, and closure, or why the closure principle is irrelevant to external world skepticism | 3 |
| 20 | 3 |
About Adam Leite
Adam Leite is a scholar working on Philosophy, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Family Practice, having authored 27 papers that have together received 258 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (24 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (14 papers) and Theology and Philosophy of Evil (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Philosophy (226 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (129 citations) and Cognitive Neuroscience (105 citations). Adam Leite has collaborated with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Frequent co-authors include Kate Abramson, Andrew Reisner, Mark Schroeder, Alan Millar, Asbjørn Steglich‐Petersen, Andrew Reisner, Ralph Wedgwood, Nishi Shah, Duncan Pritchard and Clayton Littlejohn. Their work appears in journals such as Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Journal of Personality Disorders and The Philosophical Quarterly.
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.