N. J. Schweitzer

846 total citations
24 papers, 490 citations indexed

About

N. J. Schweitzer is a scholar working on Social Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience and Law. According to data from OpenAlex, N. J. Schweitzer has authored 24 papers receiving a total of 490 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 12 papers in Social Psychology, 10 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience and 6 papers in Law. Recurrent topics in N. J. Schweitzer's work include Deception detection and forensic psychology (12 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (8 papers) and Jury Decision Making Processes (5 papers). N. J. Schweitzer is often cited by papers focused on Deception detection and forensic psychology (12 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (8 papers) and Jury Decision Making Processes (5 papers). N. J. Schweitzer collaborates with scholars based in United States, Australia and Canada. N. J. Schweitzer's co-authors include Michael J. Saks, Adina L. Roskies, Evan F. Risko, Dale Baker, Emily R. Murphy, Walter Sinnott‐Armstrong, Eyal Aharoni, Kent A. Kiehl, Jonathan J. Koehler and Jessica M. Salerno and has published in prestigious journals such as PLoS ONE, Trends in Cognitive Sciences and Cognition.

In The Last Decade

N. J. Schweitzer

23 papers receiving 444 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
N. J. Schweitzer United States	13	209	178	101	86	75	24	490
Laura Smalarz United States	13	255 1.2×	295 1.7×	109 1.1×	205 2.4×	44 0.6×	33	538
Jason Chin Australia	10	304 1.5×	107 0.6×	55 0.5×	121 1.4×	22 0.3×	46	614
Krista D. Forrest United States	11	46 0.2×	142 0.8×	68 0.7×	37 0.4×	28 0.4×	26	392
Gavin Oxburgh United Kingdom	11	160 0.8×	322 1.8×	197 2.0×	148 1.7×	9 0.1×	37	507
Kimberly Collins United Kingdom	10	100 0.5×	117 0.7×	58 0.6×	173 2.0×	7 0.1×	20	455
Nadja Schreiber Compo United States	16	543 2.6×	617 3.5×	165 1.6×	210 2.4×	31 0.4×	43	857
T. Myklebust Norway	10	158 0.8×	217 1.2×	141 1.4×	78 0.9×	22 0.3×	26	392
Coral J. Dando United Kingdom	17	538 2.6×	611 3.4×	254 2.5×	201 2.3×	24 0.3×	51	936
Rachel Wilcock United Kingdom	14	499 2.4×	408 2.3×	140 1.4×	73 0.8×	32 0.4×	40	643
James Lea United Kingdom	9	184 0.9×	236 1.3×	70 0.7×	112 1.3×	26 0.3×	22	416

Countries citing papers authored by N. J. Schweitzer

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by N. J. Schweitzer

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of N. J. Schweitzer

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

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

20 of 20 papers shown

Growns, Bethany, Erwin J.A.T. Mattijssen, Jessica M. Salerno, et al.. (2022). Finding the perfect match: Fingerprint expertise facilitates statistical learning and visual comparison decision-making.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied. 29(2). 386–397. 5 indexed citations

Growns, Bethany, Alice Towler, James D. Dunn, et al.. (2022). Statistical feature training improves fingerprint-matching accuracy in novices and professional fingerprint examiners. Cognitive Research Principles and Implications. 7(1). 60–60. 4 indexed citations

Salerno, Jessica M., et al.. (2021). Can neuroimaging prove pain and suffering?: The influence of pain assessment techniques on legal judgments of physical versus emotional pain.. Law and Human Behavior. 45(5). 393–412. 4 indexed citations

Schweitzer, N. J., et al.. (2019). What information shapes and shifts people’s attitudes about capital punishment?. PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints). 1 indexed citations

Salerno, Jessica M., et al.. (2018). Closing with emotion: The differential impact of male versus female attorneys expressing anger in court.. Law and Human Behavior. 42(4). 385–401. 16 indexed citations

Baker, Dale, et al.. (2015). Making sense of research on the neuroimage bias. Public Understanding of Science. 26(2). 251–258. 16 indexed citations

Saks, Michael J., et al.. (2014). A Multiattribute Utility Analysis of Legal System Responses to Medical Injuries. The De Paul law review. 54(2). 277.

Roskies, Adina L., N. J. Schweitzer, & Michael J. Saks. (2013). Neuroimages in court: less biasing than feared. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 17(3). 99–101. 27 indexed citations

Schweitzer, N. J., Dale Baker, & Evan F. Risko. (2013). Fooled by the brain: Re-examining the influence of neuroimages. Cognition. 129(3). 501–511. 33 indexed citations

10.

Baker, Dale, et al.. (2013). Visual Attention and the Neuroimage Bias. PLoS ONE. 8(9). e74449–e74449. 12 indexed citations

11.

Baker, Dale, N. J. Schweitzer, & Evan F. Risko. (2013). Perceived Access to Self-relevant Information Mediates Judgments of Privacy Violations in Neuromonitoring and Other Monitoring Technologies. Neuroethics. 7(1). 43–50. 5 indexed citations

12.

Schweitzer, N. J. & Michael J. Saks. (2012). Jurors and Scientific Causation: What Don’t They Know, and What Can Be Done About it?. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2 indexed citations

13.

Schweitzer, N. J. & Michael J. Saks. (2011). Neuroimage Evidence and the Insanity Defense. Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 29(4). 592–607. 47 indexed citations

14.

Schweitzer, N. J., et al.. (2011). Neuroimages as Evidence in a Mens Rea Defense: No Impact. 4 indexed citations

15.

Schweitzer, N. J., et al.. (2011). Neuroimages as evidence in a mens rea defense: No impact.. Psychology Public Policy and Law. 17(3). 357–393. 69 indexed citations

16.

Schweitzer, N. J. & Michael J. Saks. (2009). The gatekeeper effect: The impact of judges' admissibility decisions on the persuasiveness of expert testimony.. Psychology Public Policy and Law. 15(1). 1–18. 23 indexed citations

17.

Schweitzer, N. J., et al.. (2009). Is the Rule of Law a Law of Rules? Judgments of Rule of Law Violations. SSRN Electronic Journal. 1 indexed citations

18.

Schweitzer, N. J.. (2008). Wikipedia and Psychology: Coverage of Concepts and Its Use by Undergraduate Students. Teaching of Psychology. 35(2). 81–85. 31 indexed citations

19.

Saks, Michael J. & N. J. Schweitzer. (2007). The CSI Effect: Popular Fiction About Forensic Science Affects the Public's Expectations About Real Forensic Science. SSRN Electronic Journal. 104 indexed citations

20.

Schweitzer, N. J., et al.. (2006). Rule Violations and the Rule of Law: A Factorial Survey of Public Attitudes. The De Paul law review. 56(2). 615. 2 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