Stephanie Tully

944 total citations · 1 hit paper
23 papers, 646 citations indexed

About

Stephanie Tully is a scholar working on General Decision Sciences, Marketing and Economics and Econometrics. According to data from OpenAlex, Stephanie Tully has authored 23 papers receiving a total of 646 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 14 papers in General Decision Sciences, 6 papers in Marketing and 6 papers in Economics and Econometrics. Recurrent topics in Stephanie Tully's work include Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics (14 papers), Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis (5 papers) and Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction (4 papers). Stephanie Tully is often cited by papers focused on Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics (14 papers), Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis (5 papers) and Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction (4 papers). Stephanie Tully collaborates with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Stephanie Tully's co-authors include Russell S. Winer, Tom Meyvis, Eesha Sharma, Hal E. Hershfield, Gil Appel, Chiara Longoni, Cynthia Cryder and Xiang Wang and has published in prestigious journals such as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and Journal of Marketing.

In The Last Decade

Stephanie Tully

21 papers receiving 594 citations

Hit Papers

align trajectories

What are hit papers?

Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research topics.

Lower Artificial Intelligence Literacy Predicts Greater AI Receptivity

2025 36 citations Stephanie Tully, Chiara Longoni et al. Journal of Marketing profile →

Peers

Stephanie Tully

MARKE

SPS

SP

SM

EE

Yael Steinhart Israel

Jeffrey R. Parker United States

Aaron R. Brough United States

Ying‐Ching Lin Taiwan

Adwait Khare United States

Gert Cornelissen Spain

Robert D. Jewell United States

Sucharita Chandran United States

Femke van Horen Netherlands

Andrea Heintz Tangari United States

Yael Steinhart Israel

Stephanie Tully

398 ×1.1

MARKE

285 ×2.0

SPS

124 ×1.0

SP

57 ×0.5

SM

107 ×1.2

EE

Citations per year, relative to Stephanie Tully Stephanie Tully (= 1×) peers Yael Steinhart

Countries citing papers authored by Stephanie Tully

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephanie Tully

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Stephanie Tully

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

1.

Tully, Stephanie, Chiara Longoni, & Gil Appel. (2025). Lower Artificial Intelligence Literacy Predicts Greater AI Receptivity. Journal of Marketing. 89(5). 1–20. 36 indexed citations breakdown →

2.

Sharma, Eesha, et al.. (2023). Scarcity and intertemporal choice.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 125(5). 1036–1054. 6 indexed citations

3.

Sharma, Eesha, Stephanie Tully, & Cynthia Cryder. (2021). Psychological Ownership of (Borrowed) Money. Journal of Marketing Research. 58(3). 497–514. 20 indexed citations

4.

Sharma, Eesha, et al.. (2021). Psychological ownership interventions increase interest in claiming government benefits. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 118(35). 19 indexed citations

5.

Tully, Stephanie & Eesha Sharma. (2021). Consumer wealth. 5(1). 125–143. 16 indexed citations

6.

Sharma, Eesha, Stephanie Tully, & Cynthia Cryder. (2020). Psychological Ownership of (Borrowed) Money. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2 indexed citations

7.

Tully, Stephanie, et al.. (2020). The Impact of Payment Frequency on Subjective Wealth Perceptions and Discretionary Spending. SSRN Electronic Journal. 5 indexed citations

8.

Tully, Stephanie, et al.. (2018). Too Constrained to Converse: The Effect of Financial Constraints on Word-of-Mouth. Journal of Consumer Research. 42 indexed citations

9.

Tully, Stephanie & Tom Meyvis. (2017). Forgetting to remember our experiences: People overestimate how much they will retrospect about personal events.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 113(6). 878–891. 13 indexed citations

10.

Tully, Stephanie & Eesha Sharma. (2017). Context-Dependent Drivers of Discretionary Debt Decisions: Explaining Willingness to Borrow for Experiential Purchases. Journal of Consumer Research. 44(5). 960–973. 29 indexed citations

11.

Tully, Stephanie & Tom Meyvis. (2016). Questioning the end effect: Endings are not inherently over-weighted in retrospective evaluations of experiences.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 145(5). 630–642. 24 indexed citations

12.

Tully, Stephanie & Tom Meyvis. (2016). Questioning the End Effect: Endings Do Not Inherently Have a Disproportionate Impact on Evaluations of Experiences. ACR North American Advances.

13.

Sharma, Eesha & Stephanie Tully. (2016). Discretionary Debt Decisions: Consumer Willingness to Borrow for Experiences and Material Goods. SSRN Electronic Journal.

14.

Tully, Stephanie, Hal E. Hershfield, & Tom Meyvis. (2015). Seeking Lasting Enjoyment with Limited Money: Financial Constraints Increase Preference for Material Goods over Experiences. Journal of Consumer Research. 42(1). 59–75. 152 indexed citations

15.

Tully, Stephanie & Russell S. Winer. (2014). The Role of the Beneficiary in Willingness to Pay for Socially Responsible Products: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Retailing. 90(2). 255–274. 224 indexed citations

16.

Tully, Stephanie & Russell S. Winer. (2014). The Role of the Beneficiary in Willingness to Pay for Socially Responsible Products: A Meta-Analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal. 22 indexed citations

17.

Tully, Stephanie & Tom Meyvis. (2014). Questioning the End Effect: Endings Do Not Inherently Have a Disproportionate Impact on Evaluations of Experiences. SSRN Electronic Journal. 1 indexed citations

18.

Tully, Stephanie & Russell S. Winer. (2013). Are People Willing to Pay More for Socially Responsible Products: A Meta-Analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal. 7 indexed citations

19.

Tully, Stephanie. (1995). America's healthiest companies.. PubMed. 131(11). 98–100, 104, 106. 3 indexed citations

20.

Tully, Stephanie. (1993). Why drug prices will go lower.. PubMed. 127(9). 56–8, 60, 62 passim. 4 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