Mark J. Huff

1.2k total citations
54 papers, 767 citations indexed

About

Mark J. Huff is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. According to data from OpenAlex, Mark J. Huff has authored 54 papers receiving a total of 767 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 48 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 26 papers in Social Psychology and 16 papers in Artificial Intelligence. Recurrent topics in Mark J. Huff's work include Memory Processes and Influences (39 papers), Deception detection and forensic psychology (23 papers) and Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning (10 papers). Mark J. Huff is often cited by papers focused on Memory Processes and Influences (39 papers), Deception detection and forensic psychology (23 papers) and Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning (10 papers). Mark J. Huff collaborates with scholars based in United States, Canada and Australia. Mark J. Huff's co-authors include Glen E. Bodner, Keith A. Hutchison, Penny M. Pexman, Michele Wellsby, Ian S. Hargreaves, Melvin J. Yap, Michelle L. Meade, Christopher N. Wahlheim, Gordon R. Plague and Jennifer H. Coane and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition, Frontiers in Psychology and Psychology and Aging.

In The Last Decade

Mark J. Huff

51 papers receiving 736 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Mark J. Huff United States 15 553 279 206 197 169 54 767
James P. Van Overschelde United States 11 469 0.8× 144 0.5× 226 1.1× 189 1.0× 120 0.7× 21 723
Chunliang Yang China 15 491 0.9× 106 0.4× 330 1.6× 261 1.3× 169 1.0× 48 729
Dawn M. McBride United States 18 476 0.9× 194 0.7× 117 0.6× 215 1.1× 90 0.5× 44 716
Robert Ariel United States 15 478 0.9× 66 0.2× 325 1.6× 292 1.5× 138 0.8× 20 735
Christopher A. Rowland United States 6 514 0.9× 97 0.3× 424 2.1× 247 1.3× 246 1.5× 8 848
Kenneth J. Malmberg United States 22 1.2k 2.2× 452 1.6× 308 1.5× 179 0.9× 468 2.8× 38 1.3k
Jason R. Finley United States 15 366 0.7× 62 0.2× 251 1.2× 199 1.0× 141 0.8× 28 655
Michael F. Verde United Kingdom 17 518 0.9× 211 0.8× 135 0.7× 118 0.6× 165 1.0× 24 693
Jennifer H. Coane United States 17 526 1.0× 152 0.5× 271 1.3× 202 1.0× 170 1.0× 38 669
Jerwen Jou United States 16 446 0.8× 141 0.5× 145 0.7× 214 1.1× 75 0.4× 54 692

Countries citing papers authored by Mark J. Huff

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Mark J. Huff

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark J. Huff. 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 Mark J. Huff. The network helps show where Mark J. Huff may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mark J. Huff

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mark J. Huff. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mark J. Huff 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 Mark J. Huff. Mark J. Huff 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.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2025). Critical lure source details are “correctly” attributed to both directly related and mediated lists. Frontiers in Psychology. 16. 1529070–1529070.
2.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2025). Suggestibility to additive versus contradictory misinformation: effects of visual and auditory post-event information. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 37(4). 308–322.
3.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2024). Singing Does Not Necessarily Improve Memory More Than Reading Aloud. Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie). 71(1). 33–50. 2 indexed citations
5.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2024). Evaluating the effects of brief mindfulness practice on attentional control and episodic memory. Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 36(6). 720–741. 2 indexed citations
6.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2023). Item-specific and relational encoding are effective at reducing the illusion of competence. Psychological Research. 88(3). 1023–1044. 1 indexed citations
8.
Coane, Jennifer H., et al.. (2021). Manipulations of List Type in the DRM Paradigm: A Review of How Structural and Conceptual Similarity Affect False Memory. Frontiers in Psychology. 12. 668550–668550. 20 indexed citations
9.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2021). The lrd package: An R package and Shiny application for processing lexical data. Behavior Research Methods. 54(4). 2001–2024. 3 indexed citations
10.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2020). The deceptive nature of associative word pairs: the effects of associative direction on judgments of learning. Psychological Research. 85(4). 1757–1775. 8 indexed citations
11.
Huff, Mark J. & Sharda Umanath. (2017). Evaluating suggestibility to additive and contradictory misinformation following explicit error detection in younger and older adults.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied. 24(2). 180–195. 13 indexed citations
12.
Wahlheim, Christopher N., Lauren L. Richmond, Mark J. Huff, & Ian G. Dobbins. (2016). Characterizing adult age differences in the initiation and organization of retrieval: A further investigation of retrieval dynamics in dual-list free recall.. Psychology and Aging. 31(7). 786–797. 10 indexed citations
13.
Huff, Mark J., David A. Balota, & Keith A. Hutchison. (2016). The costs and benefits of testing and guessing on recognition memory.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition. 42(10). 1559–1572. 6 indexed citations
15.
Wahlheim, Christopher N. & Mark J. Huff. (2015). Age differences in the focus of retrieval: Evidence from dual-list free recall.. Psychology and Aging. 30(4). 768–780. 27 indexed citations
16.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2015). List blocking and longer retention intervals reveal an influence of gist processing for lexically ambiguous critical lures. Memory & Cognition. 43(8). 1193–1207. 9 indexed citations
17.
Huff, Mark J., Sara D. Davis, & Michelle L. Meade. (2013). The effects of initial testing on false recall and false recognition in the social contagion of memory paradigm. Memory & Cognition. 41(6). 820–831. 26 indexed citations
18.
Huff, Mark J. & Glen E. Bodner. (2013). When does memory monitoring succeed versus fail? Comparing item-specific and relational encoding in the DRM paradigm.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition. 39(4). 1246–1256. 51 indexed citations
19.
Huff, Mark J., et al.. (2012). Interpolated task effects on direct and mediated false recognition: Effects of initial recall, recognition, and the ironic effect of guessing.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition. 38(6). 1720–1730. 23 indexed citations
20.
Huff, Mark J. & Keith A. Hutchison. (2011). The effects of mediated word lists on false recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition. 39(6). 941–953. 21 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

Rankless by CCL
2026