University of Göttingen

3.1M citations
87.5k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

University of Göttingen

79.5k papers receiving 2.9M citations

Peers

University of Göttingen
Comparison fields: 5 of 252
  • Neurology 106.1k
  • Inorganic Chemistry 167.2k
  • Organic Chemistry 299.9k
  • Soil Science 98.5k
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 104.9k
Replace Technical University of Munich with:
Technical University of Munich Germany
Max Planck Society Germany
ETH Zurich Switzerland
Utrecht University Netherlands
KU Leuven Belgium
University of Bonn Germany
University of Zurich Switzerland
University of Freiburg Germany
University of Groningen Netherlands
University of Tübingen Germany
University of Göttingen relative to Technical University of Munich Germany Technical University of Munich's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.6×
Technical University of Munich · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at University of Göttingen

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at University of Göttingen. 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 papers produced at University of Göttingen with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites University of Göttingen more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at University of Göttingen

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with University of Göttingen at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with University of Göttingen at the time of their publication.

About University of Göttingen

In recent decades, authors affiliated with University of Göttingen have published 87.5k papers, which have received a total of 3.1M indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 383 papers in Structural Biology, 3.4k papers in Inorganic Chemistry, 6.6k papers in Organic Chemistry, 2.8k papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation and 2.2k papers in Soil Science on the topics of Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (1.8k papers), Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics (1.7k papers), Synthesis and characterization of novel inorganic/organometallic compounds (1.4k papers), Plant and animal studies (1.4k papers), Organometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis (1.2k papers), Advanced Chemical Physics Studies (1.2k papers), Geological and Geochemical Analysis (1.2k papers) and Geology and Paleoclimatology Research (1.2k papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Neurology (106.1k citations), Inorganic Chemistry (167.2k citations), Organic Chemistry (299.9k citations), Soil Science (98.5k citations) and Nature and Landscape Conservation (104.9k citations). Authors at University of Göttingen collaborate with scholars in Germany, United States and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including PLoS ONE, Die Naturwissenschaften, Scientific Reports, Angewandte Chemie International Edition and Archives of Microbiology. Some of University of Göttingen's most productive authors include George M. Sheldrick, Lutz Ackermann, Walter Paulus, Teja Tscharntke, Yakov Kuzyakov, Michael A. Nitsche, Herbert W. Roesky, J. Troe, Rüdiger Hardeland and Matin Qaim.

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 institutions with similar magnitude of impact