Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Cross-Sectional versus Longitudinal Survey Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines
2008887 citationsAric Rindfleisch, Alan J. Malter et al.Journal of Marketing Researchprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Alan J. Malter
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Alan J. Malter'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 Alan J. Malter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Alan J. Malter more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Alan J. Malter. 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 Alan J. Malter. The network helps show where Alan J. Malter may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Alan J. Malter
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Alan J. Malter.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Alan J. Malter 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 Alan J. Malter. Alan J. Malter is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Reimann, Martin, Alan J. Malter, Joshua M. Ackerman, et al.. (2012). Embodiment in judgment and choice.. Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics. 5(2). 104–123.27 indexed citations
Malter, Alan J., José Antônio Rosa, & Ellen Garbarino. (2008). Using Virtual Models to Evaluate Real Products For Real Bodies. ACR North American Advances.2 indexed citations
8.
Rindfleisch, Aric, Alan J. Malter, Shankar Ganesan, & Christine Moorman. (2008). Cross-Sectional versus Longitudinal Survey Research: Concepts, Findings, and Guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research. 45(3). 261–279.887 indexed citations breakdown →
9.
Kreuzbauer, Robert & Alan J. Malter. (2007). Product Design Perception and Brand Categorization. View.10 indexed citations
10.
Lusch, Robert F., Stephen L. Vargo, & Alan J. Malter. (2006). Marketing as Service-Exchange:. Organizational Dynamics. 35(3). 264–278.97 indexed citations
Glenberg, Arthur M., David A. Robertson, Michael P. Kaschak, & Alan J. Malter. (2003). Embodied meaning and negative priming. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 26(5). 644–648.5 indexed citations
18.
Malter, Alan J., et al.. (1997). Special Session Summary Embodied Cognition: Towards a More Realistic and Productive Model of Mental Representation. ACR North American Advances.1 indexed citations
19.
Malter, Alan J. & Joel E. Urbany. (1997). New frontiers in competitive decision making : toward a research agenda : conference on competitive desicion making June 6-8, 1997, Charleston, South Carolina. Marketing Science Institute eBooks.1 indexed citations
20.
Malter, Alan J.. (1996). An Introduction to Embodied Cognition: Implications For Consumer Research. ACR North American Advances.11 indexed citations
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.