Daniel Conroy‐Beam

24 papers receiving 782 citations

Peers

Daniel Conroy‐Beam
Comparison fields: 5 of 78
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 594
  • Social Psychology 286
  • Marketing 123
  • Sociology and Political Science 386
  • Clinical Psychology 184
Replace Diana S. Fleischman with:
Diana S. Fleischman United Kingdom
Oliver Sng United States
Marco Antônio Corrêa Varella Brazil
Khandis R. Blake Australia
Aaron W. Lukaszewski United States
Jason Weeden United States
Carin Perilloux United States
Cari D. Goetz United States
Elizabeth G. Pillsworth United States
Manfred Hassebrauck Germany
Daniel Conroy‐Beam relative to Diana S. Fleischman United Kingdom Diana S. Fleischman's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.1×
Diana S. Fleischman · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Daniel Conroy‐Beam

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Daniel Conroy‐Beam

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel Conroy‐Beam. 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 Daniel Conroy‐Beam. The network helps show where Daniel Conroy‐Beam may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 20 scholars most cited alongside Daniel Conroy‐Beam, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Daniel Conroy‐Beam Line = papers co-authored together Daniel Conroy‐Beam links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 25 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2015137
2 2016100
3 201780
4 201571
5 201662
6 201849
7 201145
8 201645
9 201638
10 201730
11 201928
12 201625
13 201220
14 201718
15 202116
16 202015
17 202213
18 20197
19 20243
20 20233

About Daniel Conroy‐Beam

Daniel Conroy‐Beam is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, Social Psychology, Marketing and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, having authored 25 papers that have together received 810 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior (22 papers), Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation (14 papers), Marriage and Sexual Relationships (8 papers), Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification (5 papers), Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (3 papers), Attachment and Relationship Dynamics (3 papers), Animal Behavior and Reproduction (3 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (594 citations), Social Psychology (286 citations), Marketing (123 citations), Sociology and Political Science (386 citations) and Clinical Psychology (184 citations). Daniel Conroy‐Beam has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Italy and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include David M. Buss, Kelly Asao, Laith Al-Shawaf, Cari D. Goetz, David M. G. Lewis, Joshua D. Duntley, Michael N. Pham, Todd K. Shackelford, André Luiz Souza and Jaimie Arona Krems. Their work appears in journals such as Evolution and Human Behavior, Personality and Individual Differences, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Open Mind and Psychological Inquiry.

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