The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization.

405 indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2015, received 405 indexed citations. Written by Nour Kteily, Emile Bruneau, Adam Waytz and Sarah Cotterill covering the research area of Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology and Political Science and Social Psychology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (319 citations), Social Psychology (225 citations) and Cognitive Neuroscience (128 citations). Published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Countries where authors are citing The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization.

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization.. 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 The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. more than expected).

Fields of papers citing The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization.

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization..

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.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000048.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026