Mary L. Inman

1.7k total citations
19 papers, 697 citations indexed

About

Mary L. Inman is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Mary L. Inman has authored 19 papers receiving a total of 697 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 8 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 7 papers in Social Psychology and 7 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Mary L. Inman's work include Social and Intergroup Psychology (7 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (6 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (5 papers). Mary L. Inman is often cited by papers focused on Social and Intergroup Psychology (7 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (6 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (5 papers). Mary L. Inman collaborates with scholars based in United States, Canada and China. Mary L. Inman's co-authors include Robert S. Baron, John R. Chambers, Henrietta L. Logan, Chuan Feng Kao, Michael Brennan, Robert A. Baron, James P. David, Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet, Carolina González and Namhee Kim and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Psychological Science and Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

In The Last Decade

Mary L. Inman

19 papers receiving 650 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 L. Inman United States 11 543 309 187 107 63 19 697
Tomas Ståhl Netherlands 12 434 0.8× 181 0.6× 60 0.3× 200 1.9× 78 1.2× 23 574
Mathias Blanz Germany 12 550 1.0× 366 1.2× 138 0.7× 93 0.9× 34 0.5× 18 718
Ángel Gómez Spain 2 513 0.9× 389 1.3× 47 0.3× 117 1.1× 37 0.6× 2 670
Sylvie Graf Czechia 13 445 0.8× 269 0.9× 86 0.5× 60 0.6× 29 0.5× 28 580
Ruthie Pliskin Netherlands 15 431 0.8× 316 1.0× 70 0.4× 81 0.8× 55 0.9× 29 601
Vilma Ortiz Colombia 8 295 0.5× 157 0.5× 80 0.4× 73 0.7× 52 0.8× 17 539
Brian Collisson United States 10 280 0.5× 208 0.7× 67 0.4× 67 0.6× 34 0.5× 31 505
Negin R. Toosi United States 12 366 0.7× 185 0.6× 114 0.6× 60 0.6× 33 0.5× 19 561
Geoffrey Wetherell United States 12 641 1.2× 392 1.3× 63 0.3× 173 1.6× 39 0.6× 23 791
Peggy Chekroun France 10 310 0.6× 226 0.7× 49 0.3× 114 1.1× 40 0.6× 22 499

Countries citing papers authored by Mary L. Inman

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Mary L. Inman

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mary L. Inman

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mary L. Inman. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mary L. Inman 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 L. Inman. Mary L. Inman is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

19 of 19 papers shown
1.
Park, Gewnhi, Mary L. Inman, Namhee Kim, et al.. (2022). Heart's eyes to see color: Cardiac vagal tone modulates the impact of ethnicity on selected attention under high load. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 176. 27–35. 1 indexed citations
2.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (2022). Church Affirmation Moderates the Relationship Between Weight-Rejection-Sensitivity and Body Dissatisfaction in Young Adults in the USA. Journal of Religion and Health. 62(4). 2585–2608. 1 indexed citations
3.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (2021). Reforming Dodd‐Frank from the Whistleblower's Vantage. American Business Law Journal. 58(3). 453–523. 2 indexed citations
4.
Inman, Mary L. & Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet. (2017). Body Esteem and Appearance-Based Self-Worth: A Test of Religious Moderators in Men and Women. Hope College Digital Commons (Hope College). 36(2). 139. 3 indexed citations
5.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (2016). Religious-body affirmations protect body esteem for women who base self-worth on appearance or others’ approval. Mental Health Religion & Culture. 19(1). 98–111. 7 indexed citations
6.
Inman, Mary L.. (2014). The effects of religious-body affirmations and religious commitment on men’s body esteem.. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. 6(4). 330–337. 8 indexed citations
7.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (2014). Do Religious Affirmations, Religious Commitments, or General Commitments Mitigate the Negative Effects of Exposure to Thin Ideals?. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 53(1). 38–55. 17 indexed citations
8.
Chambers, John R., Robert S. Baron, & Mary L. Inman. (2005). Misperceptions in Intergroup Conflict: Disagreeing about What We Disagree about. Hope College Digital Commons (Hope College). 4 indexed citations
9.
Chambers, John R., Robert S. Baron, & Mary L. Inman. (2005). Misperceptions in Intergroup Conflict. Psychological Science. 17(1). 38–45. 95 indexed citations
10.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (2004). Boasting and Firsthand and Secondhand Impressions: A New Explanation for the Positive Teller-Listener Extremity Effect. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 26(1). 59–75. 14 indexed citations
11.
Inman, Mary L.. (2001). Do You See What I See?: Similarities And Differences In Victims' And Observers' Perceptions Of Discrimination. Social Cognition. 19(5). 521–546. 32 indexed citations
12.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (1998). Perceiving Discrimination: The Role of Prototypes and Norm Violation. Social Cognition. 16(4). 418–450. 47 indexed citations
13.
Baron, Robert S., et al.. (1997). Why listeners hear less than they are told: Attentional load and the teller-listener extremity effect.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72(4). 826–838. 12 indexed citations
14.
Baron, Robert S., et al.. (1997). Why listeners hear less than they are told: Attentional load and the teller–listener extremity effect.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72(4). 826–838. 9 indexed citations
15.
Inman, Mary L. & Robert S. Baron. (1996). Influence of prototypes on perceptions of prejudice.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70(4). 727–739. 169 indexed citations
16.
Inman, Mary L. & Robert S. Baron. (1996). Influence of prototypes on perceptions of prejudice.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70(4). 727–739. 147 indexed citations
17.
Baron, Robert A., et al.. (1994). Negative Emotion and Message Processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 30(2). 181–201. 67 indexed citations
18.
Inman, Mary L., et al.. (1993). Do We Tell Less Than We Know or Hear Less Than We Are Told? Exploring the Teller-Listener Extremity Effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 29(6). 528–550. 11 indexed citations
19.
Baron, Robert S., Mary L. Inman, Chuan Feng Kao, & Henrietta L. Logan. (1992). Negative emotion and superficial social processing. Motivation and Emotion. 16(4). 323–346. 51 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 Tomas Ståhl Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Mathias Blanz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ángel Gómez Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sylvie Graf Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ruthie Pliskin Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Vilma Ortiz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Brian Collisson Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Negin R. Toosi Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Geoffrey Wetherell Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Peggy Chekroun
Rankless by CCL
2026