Sharon Leal

5.0k total citations
121 papers, 3.0k citations indexed

About

Sharon Leal is a scholar working on Social Psychology, Clinical Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience. According to data from OpenAlex, Sharon Leal has authored 121 papers receiving a total of 3.0k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 115 papers in Social Psychology, 62 papers in Clinical Psychology and 51 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience. Recurrent topics in Sharon Leal's work include Deception detection and forensic psychology (115 papers), Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending (61 papers) and Memory Processes and Influences (47 papers). Sharon Leal is often cited by papers focused on Deception detection and forensic psychology (115 papers), Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending (61 papers) and Memory Processes and Influences (47 papers). Sharon Leal collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Sweden. Sharon Leal's co-authors include Aldert Vrij, Samantha Mann, Ronald P. Fisher, Pär Anders Granhag, Zarah Vernham, Lara Warmelink, Jackie Hillman, Ray Bull, Haneen Deeb and Rebecca Milne and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Trends in Cognitive Sciences and Scientific Reports.

In The Last Decade

Sharon Leal

112 papers receiving 2.8k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Sharon Leal United Kingdom 29 2.8k 1.6k 1.3k 1.1k 740 121 3.0k
Samantha Mann United Kingdom 36 3.6k 1.3× 2.2k 1.4× 1.5k 1.1× 1.5k 1.3× 846 1.1× 109 3.9k
Jaume Masip Spain 21 1.1k 0.4× 653 0.4× 375 0.3× 493 0.4× 371 0.5× 71 1.3k
Leanne ten Brinke Canada 23 1.0k 0.4× 691 0.4× 675 0.5× 637 0.6× 213 0.3× 54 1.9k
Ewout H. Meijer Netherlands 21 1.6k 0.6× 1.3k 0.8× 935 0.7× 502 0.5× 505 0.7× 73 2.3k
Fiona Gabbert United Kingdom 25 1.2k 0.4× 194 0.1× 1.5k 1.1× 443 0.4× 157 0.2× 79 2.0k
Günter Köhnken Germany 15 816 0.3× 376 0.2× 526 0.4× 276 0.2× 142 0.2× 27 1.0k
Brian R. Clifford United Kingdom 18 821 0.3× 242 0.2× 836 0.6× 258 0.2× 161 0.2× 53 1.5k
J. Don Read Canada 27 1.2k 0.4× 429 0.3× 2.1k 1.6× 353 0.3× 232 0.3× 72 2.8k
Coral J. Dando United Kingdom 17 611 0.2× 254 0.2× 538 0.4× 201 0.2× 97 0.1× 51 936
Sara Landström Sweden 20 445 0.2× 383 0.2× 266 0.2× 322 0.3× 124 0.2× 64 992

Countries citing papers authored by Sharon Leal

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Sharon Leal

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Sharon Leal

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Sharon Leal. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Sharon Leal 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 Sharon Leal. Sharon Leal 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.
Deeb, Haneen, et al.. (2024). Veracity Judgments Based on Complications: A Training Experiment. Behavioral Sciences. 14(9). 839–839.
2.
Deeb, Haneen, et al.. (2024). Exposing Suspects to Their Sketches in Repeated Interviews to Elicit Information and Veracity Cues. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 16(1). 1–15. 2 indexed citations
3.
Deeb, Haneen, et al.. (2024). To Nod or Not to Nod: How Does Interviewer Nonverbal Behavior Affect Rapport Perceptions and Recall in Truth Tellers and Lie Tellers?. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 48(1). 25–45. 1 indexed citations
4.
Leal, Sharon, et al.. (2024). Introducing the high-context communication style interview protocol to detect deception in pairs. Acta Psychologica. 249. 104440–104440.
5.
Leal, Sharon, et al.. (2023). Verbal Cues to Deceit when Lying through Omitting Information: Examining the Effect of a Model Statement Interview Protocol. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 15(1). 1–8. 11 indexed citations
6.
Chandler, Danielle L., Aldert Vrij, Zarah Vernham, et al.. (2023). ‘Drawing to conclusion’: The effect of sketching recall methods to enhance information‐gathering and cues to deceit. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 37(5). 1094–1112. 2 indexed citations
7.
Leal, Sharon, et al.. (2023). Combining the Devil’s Advocate Approach and Verifiability Approach to Assess Veracity in Opinion Statements. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 15(2). 53–61. 3 indexed citations
8.
Mann, Samantha, Aldert Vrij, Haneen Deeb, & Sharon Leal. (2023). All mouth and trousers? Use of the Devil’s Advocate questioning protocol to determine authenticity of opinions about protester actions. Psychiatry Psychology and Law. 1–23. 2 indexed citations
9.
Vrij, Aldert, Sharon Leal, & Ronald P. Fisher. (2023). Interviewing to Detect Lies About Opinions: The Devil’s Advocate Approach. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal. 10(12). 245–252.
10.
Harvey, Adam Charles, Aldert Vrij, Sharon Leal, Lorraine Hope, & Samantha Mann. (2019). Amplifying deceivers’ flawed metacognition: Encouraging disclosures after delays with a model statement. Acta Psychologica. 200. 102935–102935. 7 indexed citations
11.
Vrij, Aldert, et al.. (2019). Eliciting Response Bias Within Forced Choice Tests to Detect Random Responders. Scientific Reports. 9(1). 8724–8724. 1 indexed citations
12.
Harvey, Adam Charles, Aldert Vrij, Lorraine Hope, Sharon Leal, & Samantha Mann. (2017). A stability bias effect among deceivers.. Law and Human Behavior. 41(6). 519–529. 14 indexed citations
13.
Vrij, Aldert, Sharon Leal, Samantha Mann, et al.. (2017). Using the model statement to elicit information and cues to deceit in interpreter-based interviews. Acta Psychologica. 177. 44–53. 51 indexed citations
14.
Mann, Samantha, et al.. (2015). The deterrence of deception through imposing cognitive load. 7. 90–105. 2 indexed citations
15.
Vrij, Aldert, et al.. (2015). Using the Reverse Order Technique with Non‐Native Speakers or Through an Interpreter. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 30(2). 242–249. 22 indexed citations
16.
Vrij, Aldert, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, & Ronald P. Fisher. (2010). ‘Look into my eyes’: can an instruction to maintain eye contact facilitate lie detection?. Psychology Crime and Law. 16(4). 327–348. 90 indexed citations
17.
Vrij, Aldert, Samantha Mann, Sharon Leal, & Pär Anders Granhag. (2010). Getting into the minds of pairs of liars and truth tellers: An examination of their strategies. 3(1). 17–22. 32 indexed citations
18.
Warmelink, Lara, et al.. (2010). Thermal imaging as a lie detection tool at airports.. Law and Human Behavior. 35(1). 40–48. 52 indexed citations
19.
Leal, Sharon, et al.. (2008). The time of the crime: Cognitively induced tonic arousal suppression when lying in a free recall context. Acta Psychologica. 129(1). 1–7. 15 indexed citations
20.
Vrij, Aldert, Samantha Mann, Ronald P. Fisher, et al.. (2007). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: The benefit of recalling an event in reverse order.. Law and Human Behavior. 32(3). 253–265. 283 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 Samantha Mann Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Jaume Masip Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Leanne ten Brinke Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ewout H. Meijer Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Fiona Gabbert Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Günter Köhnken Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Brian R. Clifford Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by J. Don Read Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Coral J. Dando Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Sara Landström
Rankless by CCL
2026