Stephen M. Marcus

434 total citations
11 papers, 345 citations indexed

About

Stephen M. Marcus is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Artificial Intelligence and Signal Processing. According to data from OpenAlex, Stephen M. Marcus has authored 11 papers receiving a total of 345 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 7 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 6 papers in Artificial Intelligence and 4 papers in Signal Processing. Recurrent topics in Stephen M. Marcus's work include Phonetics and Phonology Research (6 papers), Speech Recognition and Synthesis (5 papers) and Speech and Audio Processing (4 papers). Stephen M. Marcus is often cited by papers focused on Phonetics and Phonology Research (6 papers), Speech Recognition and Synthesis (5 papers) and Speech and Audio Processing (4 papers). Stephen M. Marcus collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Netherlands. Stephen M. Marcus's co-authors include Y. So, E. Kaplan, John Morton, J. R. Morton, Donald W. Brown and Bishnu S. Atal and has published in prestigious journals such as The Journal of Physiology, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America and Journal of Experimental Psychology General.

In The Last Decade

Stephen M. Marcus

11 papers receiving 319 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Stephen M. Marcus United Kingdom	7	223	161	85	67	67	11	345
Ian Boardman United States	7	216 1.0×	75 0.5×	194 2.3×	159 2.4×	45 0.7×	10	426
Timothy S. Smith United States	7	217 1.0×	252 1.6×	131 1.5×	46 0.7×	60 0.9×	15	488
Gary Tajchman United States	7	146 0.7×	66 0.4×	100 1.2×	34 0.5×	114 1.7×	12	327
Lynn D. Zimba United States	11	527 2.4×	172 1.1×	29 0.3×	6 0.1×	35 0.5×	12	607
Lloyd Gilden United States	5	401 1.8×	66 0.4×	15 0.2×	13 0.2×	20 0.3×	8	484
Rosario Tomasello Germany	13	332 1.5×	128 0.8×	55 0.6×	9 0.1×	65 1.0×	27	475
Thomas L. Harrington United States	6	250 1.1×	66 0.4×	15 0.2×	6 0.1×	16 0.2×	14	344
Travis Meyer United States	13	662 3.0×	82 0.5×	50 0.6×	15 0.2×	36 0.5×	15	708
Raffaella Folli United Kingdom	13	244 1.1×	206 1.3×	222 2.6×	99 1.5×	53 0.8×	33	754
Ling-Po Shiu United States	9	719 3.2×	173 1.1×	23 0.3×	4 0.1×	51 0.8×	13	778

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen M. Marcus

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen M. Marcus

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen M. Marcus. 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 Stephen M. Marcus. The network helps show where Stephen M. Marcus may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Stephen M. Marcus

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Stephen M. Marcus. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Stephen M. Marcus 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 Stephen M. Marcus. Stephen M. Marcus 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:

11 of 11 papers shown

1.

Marcus, Stephen M., et al.. (2002). Prompt constrained natural language-evolving the next generation of telephony services. 2. 857–860. 6 indexed citations

2.

Marcus, Stephen M., et al.. (1989). Temporal decomposition of speech. Speech Communication. 8(2). 125–135. 31 indexed citations

3.

Marcus, Stephen M. & Bishnu S. Atal. (1986). Decoding the speech code—Applications of temporal decomposition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 80(S1). S17–S17. 2 indexed citations

4.

Marcus, Stephen M., et al.. (1985). Word recognition—uniqueness or deviation? a theoretical note. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1(2). 163–169. 11 indexed citations

5.

Marcus, Stephen M., et al.. (1982). Contextual effects in the stimulus suffix paradigm. British Journal of Psychology. 73(3). 383–387. 4 indexed citations

6.

Marcus, Stephen M.. (1981). ERIS-context sensitive coding in speech perception. Journal of Phonetics. 9(2). 197–220. 12 indexed citations

7.

Morton, J. R., et al.. (1981). The acoustic correlates of "speechlike": A use of the suffix effect.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 110(4). 568–593. 26 indexed citations

8.

Marcus, Stephen M.. (1981). Acoustic determinants of perceptual center (P-center) location. Perception & Psychophysics. 30(3). 247–256. 126 indexed citations

9.

Morton, John, et al.. (1981). The acoustic correlates of "speechlike": A use of the suffix effect.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. 110(4). 568–593. 27 indexed citations

10.

Kaplan, E., Stephen M. Marcus, & Y. So. (1979). Effects of dark adaptation on spatial and temporal properties of receptive fields in cat lateral geniculate nucleus.. The Journal of Physiology. 294(1). 561–580. 95 indexed citations

11.

Marcus, Stephen M.. (1978). Distinguishing “slit” and “split”—an invariant timing cue in speech perception. Perception & Psychophysics. 23(1). 58–60. 5 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