Mary C. Williams

1.0k total citations
27 papers, 768 citations indexed

About

Mary C. Williams is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Social Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Mary C. Williams has authored 27 papers receiving a total of 768 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 16 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 5 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and 3 papers in Social Psychology. Recurrent topics in Mary C. Williams's work include Visual perception and processing mechanisms (13 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (7 papers) and Tactile and Sensory Interactions (6 papers). Mary C. Williams is often cited by papers focused on Visual perception and processing mechanisms (13 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (7 papers) and Tactile and Sensory Interactions (6 papers). Mary C. Williams collaborates with scholars based in United States, Australia and France. Mary C. Williams's co-authors include Julie R. Brannan, James G. May, Bruno G. Breitmeyer, William P. Dunlap, Robert S. Kennedy, Naomi Weisstein, Kevin W. Greve, Carolina Gutiérrez‐Junquera, William Lovegrove and Jill Brooks and has published in prestigious journals such as Neuropsychologia, Vision Research and Brain and Language.

In The Last Decade

Mary C. Williams

26 papers receiving 708 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Mary C. Williams United States 15 544 251 143 134 133 27 768
Justin OʼBrien United Kingdom 12 1.0k 1.9× 231 0.9× 89 0.6× 128 1.0× 67 0.5× 23 1.2k
Jeffrey D. Holtzman United States 16 958 1.8× 106 0.4× 116 0.8× 188 1.4× 35 0.3× 19 1.2k
Julie R. Brannan United States 9 290 0.5× 124 0.5× 95 0.7× 54 0.4× 68 0.5× 19 469
Renée Béland Canada 19 691 1.3× 408 1.6× 81 0.6× 242 1.8× 41 0.3× 43 1.1k
Maria Michela Del Viva Italy 12 615 1.1× 85 0.3× 121 0.8× 301 2.2× 26 0.2× 32 758
Keith A. Scholey United Kingdom 9 489 0.9× 125 0.5× 75 0.5× 172 1.3× 45 0.3× 10 721
Ronald Calvanio United States 10 769 1.4× 169 0.7× 102 0.7× 224 1.7× 33 0.2× 15 1.0k
Antti Tarkiainen Finland 12 1.1k 2.0× 543 2.2× 108 0.8× 411 3.1× 118 0.9× 15 1.3k
Karen S. Reinke United States 15 860 1.6× 85 0.3× 75 0.5× 371 2.8× 26 0.2× 17 977
Rebecca L. Achtman United States 8 505 0.9× 111 0.4× 58 0.4× 190 1.4× 19 0.1× 10 723

Countries citing papers authored by Mary C. Williams

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Mary C. Williams

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mary C. Williams. 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 Mary C. Williams. The network helps show where Mary C. Williams may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mary C. Williams

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mary C. Williams. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mary C. Williams 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 Mary C. Williams. Mary C. Williams 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.
Fisher, Robert L. & Mary C. Williams. (2013). Unlocking Literacy. David Fulton Publishers eBooks. 1 indexed citations
2.
Wong, Kwok‐Kin, Julián Carretero, María I. Ramirez, et al.. (2010). Increased Ets-1 Positively Correlates With Twist1 Expression In Mouse Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Progression And Metastases. A2054–A2054. 1 indexed citations
3.
Héran, F., et al.. (1999). [Low visual acuity, disorders of the visual field: how to adapt the imaging of optical pathways to clinical practice?].. PubMed. 26(4). 215–24. 1 indexed citations
4.
Greve, Kevin W., et al.. (1997). Factorial structure of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 36(2). 283–285. 37 indexed citations
5.
Williams, Mary C. & James G. May. (1996). On a failure to replicate: Methodologically close, but not close enough. A response to Hogbenet al.. Vision Research. 36(10). 1509–1511. 1 indexed citations
6.
Greve, Kevin W., et al.. (1996). The role of attention in Wisconsin card sorting test performance. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 11(3). 215–222. 37 indexed citations
7.
Williams, Mary C., et al.. (1995). The effects of spatial filtering and contrast reduction on visual search times in good and poor readers. Vision Research. 35(2). 285–291. 17 indexed citations
8.
Williams, Mary C., et al.. (1994). Effect of wavelength on performance of attention-disordered and normal children on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test.. Neuropsychology. 8(2). 187–193. 6 indexed citations
9.
Williams, Mary C., Bruno G. Breitmeyer, William Lovegrove, & Carolina Gutiérrez‐Junquera. (1991). Metacontrast with masks varying in spatial frequency and wavelength. Vision Research. 31(11). 2017–2023. 31 indexed citations
10.
Breitmeyer, Bruno G. & Mary C. Williams. (1990). Effects of isoluminant-background color on metacontrast and stroboscopic motion: Interactions between sustained (P) and transient (M) channels. Vision Research. 30(7). 1069–1075. 84 indexed citations
11.
May, James G., Robert S. Kennedy, Mary C. Williams, William P. Dunlap, & Julie R. Brannan. (1990). Eye movement indices of mental workload. Acta Psychologica. 75(1). 75–89. 127 indexed citations
12.
May, James G., Mary C. Williams, & William P. Dunlap. (1988). Temporal order judgements in good and poor readers. Neuropsychologia. 26(6). 917–924. 66 indexed citations
13.
Brannan, Julie R. & Mary C. Williams. (1988). Developmental versus sensory deficit effects on perceptual processing in the reading disabled. Perception & Psychophysics. 44(5). 437–444. 34 indexed citations
14.
Brannan, Julie R. & Mary C. Williams. (1987). Allocation of visual attention in good and poor readers. Perception & Psychophysics. 41(1). 23–28. 117 indexed citations
15.
May, James G., Robert S. Kennedy, Mary C. Williams, William P. Dunlap, & Julie R. Brannan. (1986). Eye Movements as an Index of Mental Workload.. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). 1 indexed citations
16.
Williams, Mary C., et al.. (1985). Perceptual grouping in good and poor readers. Perception & Psychophysics. 38(4). 367–374. 42 indexed citations
17.
Williams, Mary C. & Naomi Weisstein. (1984). The effect of perceived depth and connectedness on metacontrast functions. Vision Research. 24(10). 1279–1288. 16 indexed citations
18.
Weisstein, Naomi, Mary C. Williams, & C. Stanley Harris. (1982). Depth, Connectedness, and Structural Relevance in the Object-Superiority Effect: Line Segments are Harder to See in Flatter Patterns. Perception. 11(1). 5–17. 18 indexed citations
19.
Williams, Mary C. & Naomi Weisstein. (1981). Spatial frequency response and perceived depth in the time-course of object superiority. Vision Research. 21(5). 631–646. 15 indexed citations
20.
White, Thomas W., et al.. (1980). Asymmetry in the brightness and darkness broca-sulzer effects. Vision Research. 20(8). 723–726. 14 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

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Justin OʼBrien Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Jeffrey D. Holtzman Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Julie R. Brannan Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Renée Béland Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Maria Michela Del Viva Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Keith A. Scholey Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ronald Calvanio Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Antti Tarkiainen Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Karen S. Reinke Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Rebecca L. Achtman
Rankless by CCL
2026