Jennifer Groscup
- Sociology and Political Science
- Law top 1%
- Clinical Psychology
- Social Psychology
- Gender Studies top 10%
- Co-authors
- Norman J. FinkelMichael J. BrownChristina A. StudebakerSteven PenrodKevin O’NeilMatthew T. HussMichele GaliettaMaureen O’Connor
- Topics
- Jury Decision Making Processes (9 papers)Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (5 papers)Deception detection and forensic psychology (4 papers)
- Cited by
- LawGender StudiesHealth
- Partner nations
- United States
In The Last Decade
Jennifer Groscup
18 papers receiving 216 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 43
- Sociology and Political Science 107
- Law 96
- Clinical Psychology 85
- Social Psychology 73
- Gender Studies 52
Countries citing papers authored by Jennifer Groscup
This map shows the geographic impact of Jennifer Groscup'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 Jennifer Groscup with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jennifer Groscup more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Jennifer Groscup
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jennifer Groscup. 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 Jennifer Groscup. The network helps show where Jennifer Groscup may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jennifer Groscup
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jennifer Groscup. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jennifer Groscup 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 Jennifer Groscup. Jennifer Groscup is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3 | |
| 2 | 12 | |
| 3 | Hot or Not? The Influence of Attorney Attractiveness and Gender on Juror Decision Making | 2 |
| 4 | Fighting Fire with Fire? Execution Impact Evidence as a Moderator of Victim Impact Statements -poster | 1 |
| 5 | 1 | |
| 6 | The effects of eyeglasses and race on juror decisions involving a violent crime. | 6 |
| 7 | 48 | |
| 8 | Gender Matters in the Insanity Defense | 22 |
| 9 | 5 | |
| 10 | Battle of the Standards for Experts in Criminal Cases: Police vs. Psychologists | 1 |
| 11 | 3 | |
| 12 | 5 | |
| 13 | 55 | |
| 14 | 13 | |
| 15 | 1 | |
| 16 | 35 | |
| 17 | 31 | |
| 18 | 19 |
About Jennifer Groscup
Jennifer Groscup is a scholar working on Law, Pharmacy and Social Psychology, having authored 18 papers that have together received 263 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Jury Decision Making Processes (9 papers), Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (5 papers) and Deception detection and forensic psychology (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Law (96 citations), Gender Studies (52 citations) and Health (46 citations). Jennifer Groscup has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Norman J. Finkel, Michael J. Brown, Christina A. Studebaker, Steven Penrod, Kevin O’Neil, Matthew T. Huss, Michele Galietta, Maureen O’Connor, Tarika Daftary‐Kapur and Eve M. Brank. Their work appears in journals such as American Behavioral Scientist, Law and Human Behavior and Journal of Family Violence.
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.