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.
The Construction of Preference
2006569 citationsSarah Lichtenstein, Cass R. Sunstein et al.Cambridge University Press eBooksprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Daniel Read'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 Daniel Read with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Daniel Read more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel Read. 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 Daniel Read. The network helps show where Daniel Read may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Daniel Read
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Daniel Read.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Daniel Read 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 Daniel Read. Daniel Read is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Scholten, Marc, et al.. (2024). The unified tradeoff model.. Psychological Review. 131(4). 1007–1044.3 indexed citations
Osman, Magda, Björn Meder, Gerd Gigerenzer, et al.. (2012). What Can Cognitive Science Say or Learn about Economic Crises. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 34(34). 48–49.1 indexed citations
Frederick, Shane, Daniel Read, & Robyn A. LeBoeuf. (2008). When I’M 64: Temporal Referencing and Discount Rates. ACR North American Advances.1 indexed citations
12.
Lagnado, David A. & Daniel Read. (2007). Judgement and choice : perspectives on the work of Daniel Kahneman. Psychology Press eBooks.1 indexed citations
13.
Lichtenstein, Sarah, Cass R. Sunstein, Paul Slovic, et al.. (2006). The Construction of Preference. Cambridge University Press eBooks.569 indexed citations breakdown →
14.
Read, Daniel, et al.. (2005). Intertemporal tradeoffs priced in interest rates and amounts: a study of method variance. London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science).2 indexed citations
15.
Read, Daniel, et al.. (2004). Musica ecclesiae, or Devotional harmony.
Strahilevitz, Michal & Daniel Read. (1996). Special Session Summary New Insights Into Variety Seeking. ACR North American Advances.2 indexed citations
20.
Read, Daniel & George Loewenstein. (1995). The diversification bias: Explaining the difference between prospective and real-time taste for variety. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied. 1(1).9 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.