Ian David Stephen

3.8k citations
80 papers · 2.7k · h-index 28

Impact in

Papers in

Ian David Stephen

75 papers receiving 2.6k citations

Peers

Ian David Stephen
Comparison fields: 5 of 106
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 881
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 363
  • Clinical Psychology 261
  • Pharmacy 14
  • Social Psychology 93
Replace Francesco Foroni with:
Francesco Foroni Italy
Amanda C. Hahn United Kingdom
Kirsten M. Poehlmann United States
Mirella Walker Switzerland
Darya L. Zabelina United States
Simone Sprenger Netherlands
Carmen E. Lefevre United Kingdom
Ophélia Deroy United Kingdom
Rainer Krause Germany
Lisa M. Oakes United States
Ian David Stephen relative to Francesco Foroni Italy Francesco Foroni's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×4.1×
Francesco Foroni · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Ian David Stephen

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Ian David Stephen

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ian David Stephen. 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 Ian David Stephen. The network helps show where Ian David Stephen may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Ian David Stephen, 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 Ian David Stephen Line = papers co-authored together Ian David Stephen links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 80 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2009221
2 2009167
3 2009151
4 2010142
5 2010138
6 2021132
7 2010118
8 2010105
9 2021103
10 201294
11 201294
12 201684
13 201482
14 201660
15 201543
16 201743
17 201740
18 202239
19 201338
20 201837

About Ian David Stephen

Ian David Stephen is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, Clinical Psychology, General Decision Sciences and Sensory Systems, having authored 80 papers that have together received 2.7k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior (35 papers), Eating Disorders and Behaviors (13 papers), Face Recognition and Perception (9 papers), Visual perception and processing mechanisms (3 papers), Communication and COVID-19 Impact (1 paper), Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior (1 paper), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (1 paper) and Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (881 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (363 citations), Clinical Psychology (261 citations), Pharmacy (14 citations) and Social Psychology (93 citations). Ian David Stephen has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, United Kingdom and Malaysia. Frequent co-authors include David Ian Perrett, Vinet Coetzee, Richard James Stevenson, Kevin R. Brooks, Jonathan Mond, Michael Stirrat, Ian S. Penton‐Voak, Isabel M. Scott, Nicholas Pound and Jingying Chen. Their work appears in journals such as PLoS ONE, Frontiers in Psychology, Evolution and Human Behavior, Perception and Royal Society Open Science.

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