Nick Perham

973 total citations
36 papers, 626 citations indexed

About

Nick Perham is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and Social Psychology. According to data from OpenAlex, Nick Perham has authored 36 papers receiving a total of 626 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 22 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 8 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology and 7 papers in Social Psychology. Recurrent topics in Nick Perham's work include Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation (11 papers), Neuroscience and Music Perception (11 papers) and Noise Effects and Management (6 papers). Nick Perham is often cited by papers focused on Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation (11 papers), Neuroscience and Music Perception (11 papers) and Noise Effects and Management (6 papers). Nick Perham collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, Sweden and Australia. Nick Perham's co-authors include Dylan M. Jones, Simon Banbury, Jonathan St. B. T. Evans, David E. Over, Valerie A. Thompson, Simon J. Handley, John E. Marsh, Simon Moore, J. Shepherd and Mike Oaksford and has published in prestigious journals such as Cognition, Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition and Addiction.

In The Last Decade

Nick Perham

34 papers receiving 588 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Nick Perham United Kingdom	15	340	131	119	112	83	36	626
Corentin Gonthier France	16	417 1.2×	346 2.6×	78 0.7×	198 1.8×	48 0.6×	47	819
Jeffrey L. Foster United States	10	230 0.7×	217 1.7×	81 0.7×	94 0.8×	13 0.2×	21	642
José Santacreu Spain	14	108 0.3×	254 1.9×	124 1.0×	127 1.1×	19 0.2×	80	688
W. Grant Willis United States	17	272 0.8×	92 0.7×	88 0.7×	248 2.2×	49 0.6×	30	726
Diana L. Young United States	7	208 0.6×	170 1.3×	98 0.8×	58 0.5×	74 0.9×	9	550
Jan Rummel Germany	21	797 2.3×	646 4.9×	115 1.0×	96 0.9×	32 0.4×	77	1.2k
Debora R. Mitchell United States	10	255 0.8×	226 1.7×	145 1.2×	149 1.3×	13 0.2×	12	758
A. Zeynep Enkavi United States	7	310 0.9×	324 2.5×	96 0.8×	52 0.5×	77 0.9×	9	742
Gerald Tehan Australia	19	824 2.4×	295 2.3×	116 1.0×	402 3.6×	5 0.1×	55	1.0k
G. S. Tune United Kingdom	11	268 0.8×	302 2.3×	135 1.1×	51 0.5×	51 0.6×	18	777

Countries citing papers authored by Nick Perham

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Nick Perham

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Nick Perham. 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 Nick Perham. The network helps show where Nick Perham may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Nick Perham

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Nick Perham. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Nick Perham 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 Nick Perham. Nick Perham 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

Hewlett, P. S., et al.. (2023). Estimating the Effects of Secure Services on Reconviction. Part 1 – Predictive Validity of the Offending Groups Reconviction Scale (OGRS-2) and Redundancy of Patient Social and Clinical Features. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health. 23(1). 85–91. 2 indexed citations

Hewlett, P. S., et al.. (2023). Estimating the Effects of Secure Services on Reconviction. Part 2 – Fewer Convictions Than Expected? Six Year Follow Up of an England and Wales Medium Secure Cohort. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health. 23(1). 76–84. 1 indexed citations

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2023). The Categorical Deviation Effect May Be Underpinned by Attentional Capture: Preliminary Evidence from the Incidental Recognition of Distracters. KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology). 6(1-2). 20–51. 2 indexed citations

Zhao, Fei, et al.. (2021). The Association Between Effectiveness of Tinnitus Intervention and Cognitive Function—A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology. 11. 553449–553449. 6 indexed citations

Marsh, John E., et al.. (2018). Postcategorical auditory distraction in short-term memory: Insights from increased task load and task type.. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition. 44(6). 882–897. 33 indexed citations

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2017). An exploratory study into the use of Psychology Participant Panels in psychology departments in the United Kingdom. Psychology Teaching Review. 23(2). 80–86.

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2016). Distraction of Mental Arithmetic by Background Speech. Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie). 63(3). 141–149. 5 indexed citations

Marsh, John E., Nick Perham, Patrik Sörqvist, & Dylan M. Jones. (2014). Boundaries of semantic distraction: Dominance and lexicality act at retrieval. Memory & Cognition. 42(8). 1285–1301. 24 indexed citations

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2014). Does listening to preferred music improve reading comprehension performance?. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 28(2). 279–284. 55 indexed citations

10.

Perham, Nick, Helen M. Hodgetts, & Simon Banbury. (2013). Mental arithmetic and non-speech office noise: An exploration of interference-by-content. Noise and Health. 15(62). 73–73. 16 indexed citations

11.

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2012). Impaired memory for syntactical information in poor readers. Memory. 21(2). 182–188. 5 indexed citations

12.

Perham, Nick & Simon Banbury. (2012). The role of rehearsal in a novel call center-type task. Noise and Health. 14(56). 1–1. 7 indexed citations

13.

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2012). Liked Music Increases Spatial Rotation Performance Regardless of Tempo. Current Psychology. 31(2). 168–181. 14 indexed citations

14.

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2012). “Not Thinking” Helps Reasoning. Current Psychology. 31(2). 160–167. 4 indexed citations

15.

Moore, Simon, et al.. (2007). The prevalence of alcohol intoxication in the night-time economy. Alcohol and Alcoholism. 42(6). 629–634. 35 indexed citations

16.

Perham, Nick, Simon Banbury, & Dylan M. Jones. (2007). Reduction in auditory distraction by retrieval strategy. Memory. 15(4). 465–473. 28 indexed citations

17.

Perham, Nick, et al.. (2007). Identifying drunkenness in the night‐time economy. Addiction. 102(3). 377–380. 39 indexed citations

18.

Oaksford, Mike & Nick Perham. (2006). Experienced and Anticipated Emotion in Deontic Reasoning. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 28(28). 2 indexed citations

19.

Perham, Nick & Mike Oaksford. (2005). Deontic Reasoning With Emotional Content: Evolutionary Psychology or Decision Theory?. Cognitive Science. 29(5). 681–718. 28 indexed citations

20.

Evans, Jonathan St. B. T., Simon J. Handley, Nick Perham, David E. Over, & Valerie A. Thompson. (2000). Frequency versus probability formats in statistical word problems. Cognition. 77(3). 197–213. 116 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