Corey Cusimano

694 total citations
24 papers, 419 citations indexed

About

Corey Cusimano is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology and Political Science and Social Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Corey Cusimano has authored 24 papers receiving a total of 419 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 22 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 12 papers in Sociology and Political Science and 11 papers in Social Psychology. Recurrent topics in Corey Cusimano's work include Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (21 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (8 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (6 papers). Corey Cusimano is often cited by papers focused on Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (21 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (8 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (6 papers). Corey Cusimano collaborates with scholars based in United States, Japan and Türkiye. Corey Cusimano's co-authors include Bertram F. Malle, John Voiklis, Matthias Scheutz, Thomas M. Arnold, Geoffrey P. Goodwin, Xuan Zhao, Tania Lombrozo, Edward B. Royzman, Robert F. Leeman and Boyoung Kim and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Trends in Cognitive Sciences and Cognition.

In The Last Decade

Corey Cusimano

23 papers receiving 402 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Corey Cusimano United States	11	270	171	163	82	57	24	419
Heather E. Gary United States	8	147 0.5×	296 1.7×	111 0.7×	46 0.6×	140 2.5×	14	416
Aimi Shazwani Ghazali Malaysia	8	79 0.3×	217 1.3×	40 0.2×	72 0.9×	169 3.0×	22	332
Sergey V. Blok United States	8	79 0.3×	90 0.5×	17 0.1×	46 0.6×	37 0.6×	14	285
Heui‐Baik Kim South Korea	10	35 0.1×	60 0.4×	69 0.4×	20 0.2×	11 0.2×	69	589
Jacob M. Paul Australia	9	112 0.4×	22 0.1×	56 0.3×	51 0.6×	46 0.8×	22	337
Julie Carpenter United States	8	75 0.3×	167 1.0×	84 0.5×	63 0.8×	104 1.8×	19	330
Joseph J. Siev United States	6	64 0.2×	55 0.3×	11 0.1×	111 1.4×	14 0.2×	11	243
Astrid M. von der Pütten Germany	6	74 0.3×	220 1.3×	34 0.2×	86 1.0×	121 2.1×	7	392
Jun‐Ki Lee South Korea	12	30 0.1×	35 0.2×	58 0.4×	23 0.3×	15 0.3×	58	380
Benedict Tiong Chee Tay Singapore	5	59 0.2×	301 1.8×	79 0.5×	69 0.8×	224 3.9×	6	403

Countries citing papers authored by Corey Cusimano

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Corey Cusimano

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Corey Cusimano

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Corey Cusimano. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Corey Cusimano 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 Corey Cusimano. Corey Cusimano is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

20 of 20 papers shown

Rozin, Paul, et al.. (2024). Americans believe in the benevolence of nature, and this belief is not lower in people who have experienced natural disasters. Judgment and Decision Making. 19. 3 indexed citations

Cusimano, Corey, et al.. (2024). Psychological freedom, rationality, and the naive theory of reasoning.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 153(3). 837–863. 2 indexed citations

Malle, Bertram F., Matthias Scheutz, Corey Cusimano, et al.. (2024). People's judgments of humans and robots in a classic moral dilemma. Cognition. 254. 105958–105958. 7 indexed citations

Lamberton, Cait, et al.. (2024). Hidden Commitments and Future Opportunities: Implicit Moral Philosophies in Consumer Psychology. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research. 10(1). 107–117.

Ståhl, Tomas & Corey Cusimano. (2023). Lay standards for reasoning predict people's acceptance of suspect claims. Current Opinion in Psychology. 55. 101727–101727. 2 indexed citations

Cusimano, Corey & Tania Lombrozo. (2023). People recognize and condone their own morally motivated reasoning. Cognition. 234. 105379–105379. 11 indexed citations

Cusimano, Corey, et al.. (2021). Reason-Based Constraint in Theory of Mind. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 43(43). 1 indexed citations

Cusimano, Corey & Tania Lombrozo. (2021). Morality justifies motivated reasoning in the folk ethics of belief. Cognition. 209. 104513–104513. 15 indexed citations

Cusimano, Corey & Tania Lombrozo. (2021). Reconciling scientific and commonsense values to improve reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 25(11). 937–949. 9 indexed citations

10.

Cusimano, Corey & Tania Lombrozo. (2020). Morality justifies motivated reasoning. Cognitive Science. 1 indexed citations

11.

Cusimano, Corey & Geoffrey P. Goodwin. (2020). People judge others to have more voluntary control over beliefs than they themselves do.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 119(5). 999–1029. 17 indexed citations

12.

Cusimano, Corey & Geoffrey P. Goodwin. (2019). Lay beliefs about the controllability of everyday mental states.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 148(10). 1701–1732. 27 indexed citations

13.

Cusimano, Corey, et al.. (2018). Measurement is the core disgust problem: Response to Inbar and Scott (2018). Judgment and Decision Making. 13(6). 639–651. 7 indexed citations

14.

Cusimano, Corey & Geoffrey P. Goodwin. (2017). Folk Attributions of Control and Intentionality Over Mental States.. Cognitive Science. 2 indexed citations

15.

Cusimano, Corey, et al.. (2017). Judgment Before Emotion: People Access Moral Evaluations Faster than Affective States.. Cognitive Science. 3 indexed citations

16.

Royzman, Edward B., Corey Cusimano, & Robert F. Leeman. (2017). What lies beneath? Fear vs. disgust as affective predictors of absolutist opposition to genetically modified food and other new technologies. Judgment and Decision Making. 12(5). 466–480. 32 indexed citations

17.

Voiklis, John, Boyoung Kim, Corey Cusimano, & Bertram F. Malle. (2016). Moral judgments of human vs. robot agents. 775–780. 51 indexed citations

18.

Zhao, Xuan, Corey Cusimano, & Bertram F. Malle. (2016). Do people spontaneously take a robot's visual perspective?. 335–342. 23 indexed citations

19.

Zhao, Xuan, Corey Cusimano, & Bertram F. Malle. (2015). Do People Spontaneously Take a Robot's Visual Perspective?. 133–134. 22 indexed citations

20.

Voiklis, John, Corey Cusimano, & Bertram F. Malle. (2014). A Social-Conceptual Map of Moral Criticism. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 36(36). 6 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact