Philip Goff

1.9k citations
40 papers · 528 · h-index 9

Impact in

Papers in

Philip Goff

33 papers receiving 443 citations

Peers

Philip Goff
Comparison fields: 5 of 61
  • History and Philosophy of Science 167
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 289
  • Philosophy 253
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 145
  • Social Psychology 87
Replace Barry Dainton with:
Barry Dainton United Kingdom
Yujin Nagasawa United Kingdom
Daniel Stoljar Australia
Terry Horgan United States
Torin Alter United States
Hud Hudson United States
Carl Gillett United States
Ned Markosian United States
Sven Walter Germany
Elizabeth Kingdom United Kingdom
Philip Goff relative to Barry Dainton United Kingdom Barry Dainton's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×8.7×
Barry Dainton · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Philip Goff

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Philip Goff

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 5 scholars most cited alongside Philip Goff, 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 Philip Goff Line = papers co-authored together Philip Goff links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 40 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2017210
2 200956
3 201043
4 201727
5
Galileo's Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness
201927
6 201819
7
Experiences Don’t Sum
201118
8 202318
9 201710
10 19988
11 20118
12 20098
13 20108
14 20218
15
Spinoza on monism
20127
16 20137
17 20186
18 20106
19 20216
20 20055

About Philip Goff

Philip Goff is a scholar working on Philosophy, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, History and Philosophy of Science, Sociology and Political Science and Social Psychology, having authored 40 papers that have together received 528 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Philosophy and Theoretical Science (18 papers), Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (9 papers), Theology and Philosophy of Evil (6 papers), Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs (5 papers), Quantum Mechanics and Applications (5 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (5 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (5 papers) and Religion and Society Interactions (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in History and Philosophy of Science (167 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (289 citations), Philosophy (253 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (145 citations) and Social Psychology (87 citations). Philip Goff has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom and United States. Frequent co-authors include David Papineau, Paul Harvey, Helen Beebee, Nikk Effingham and Philip Clayton. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Consciousness Studies, Consciousness and Cognition, Synthese, Philosophical Studies and Ratio.

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