Elliott Ash

59 papers receiving 520 citations

Peers

Elliott Ash
Comparison fields: 5 of 77
  • General Social Sciences 59
  • Law 72
  • General Decision Sciences 10
  • Communication 40
  • Political Science and International Relations 135
Replace Ethan C. Busby with:
Ethan C. Busby United States
Martijn Schoonvelde Netherlands
Timothy R. Johnson United States
Sam N. Lehman-Wilzig Israel
Gonzalo Rivero United States
Andreu Casas United States
Kostas Gemenis Netherlands
Kristina Irion Netherlands
Mikhail Myagkov United States
MATTHEW H. GRAHAM United States
Elliott Ash relative to Ethan C. Busby United States Ethan C. Busby's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×4×6×8×9×
Ethan C. Busby · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Elliott Ash

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Elliott Ash

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Elliott Ash, 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 Elliott Ash Line = papers co-authored together Elliott Ash links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 68 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 202152
2 202347
3 201531
4 202131
5 202229
6 201728
7 202028
8 202021
9 201221
10 202318
11 202215
12
New Policing, New Segregation: From Ferguson to New York
201715
13 202015
14 202314
15 202310
16 202310
17 20219
18 20188
19 20218
20 20188

About Elliott Ash

Elliott Ash is a scholar working on Law, Political Science and International Relations, General Social Sciences, Artificial Intelligence and Economics and Econometrics, having authored 68 papers that have together received 543 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Topic Modeling (15 papers), Natural Language Processing Techniques (13 papers), Judicial and Constitutional Studies (11 papers), Artificial Intelligence in Law (11 papers), Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (9 papers), Computational and Text Analysis Methods (8 papers), Media Influence and Politics (8 papers) and Electoral Systems and Political Participation (7 papers). The work is most often cited by research in General Social Sciences (59 citations), Law (72 citations), General Decision Sciences (10 citations), Communication (40 citations) and Political Science and International Relations (135 citations). Elliott Ash has collaborated with scholars based in Switzerland, United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Massimo Morelli, Stephen E. Hansen, W. Bentley MacLeod, Dominik Stammbach, Jeffrey Fagan, Daniel L. Chen, F.A.A.M. van Winden, Moritz Osnabrügge, Sergio Galletta and Richard H. R. Hahnloser. Their work appears in journals such as Political Analysis, American Economic Journal Applied Economics, American Economic Journal Economic Policy, The Economic Journal and Journal of Public Economics.

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