Bryan Frances

489 citations
32 papers · 172 · h-index 8

Impact in

Papers in

Bryan Frances

25 papers receiving 144 citations

Peers

Bryan Frances
Comparison fields: 5 of 31
  • Philosophy 144
  • History and Philosophy of Science 31
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 84
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 58
  • Theoretical Computer Science 1
Replace Andrew Moon with:
Andrew Moon United States
Stewart Goetz United States
Guy Longworth United Kingdom
Katherin A. Rogers United States
Marc A. Moffett United States
Michael Pace United States
Lisa Miracchi United States
Thomas Raleigh Germany
Avner Baz United States
T. Ryan Byerly United States
Bryan Frances relative to Andrew Moon United States Andrew Moon's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.6×
Andrew Moon · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Bryan Frances

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Bryan Frances

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Bryan Frances. 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 Bryan Frances. The network helps show where Bryan Frances may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 1 scholars most cited alongside Bryan Frances, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Bryan Frances Line = papers co-authored together Bryan Frances links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 32 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201049
2 200514
3 202213
4 200513
5 199811
6 200611
7 20159
8 20179
9 20195
10 19965
11 19645
12 19994
13 20204
14 19983
15 20133
16 20122
17 19992
18 20002
19 20201
20 20201

About Bryan Frances

Bryan Frances is a scholar working on Philosophy, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, History and Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence, having authored 32 papers that have together received 172 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (19 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (13 papers), Free Will and Agency (4 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (4 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (4 papers), Theology and Philosophy of Evil (4 papers), Philosophical Ethics and Theory (3 papers) and Political Philosophy and Ethics (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Philosophy (144 citations), History and Philosophy of Science (31 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (84 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (58 citations) and Theoretical Computer Science (1 citation). Bryan Frances has collaborated with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Frequent co-authors include Russell Eisenman. Their work appears in journals such as Philosophical Studies, Analysis, Mind, Mind & Language and American Catholic 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact