Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin

252 papers receiving 1.9k citations

Peers

Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin
Comparison fields: 5 of 193
  • History and Philosophy of Science 140
  • History 250
  • Paleontology 142
  • Political Science and International Relations 439
  • Geophysics 229
Replace Deutsches Museum with:
Deutsches Museum Germany
Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities Germany
Musée d'Art et d'Histoire Switzerland
Vatican Secret Archives Vatican
Swiss Archaeology Switzerland
École Française de Rome Italy
Maison interuniversitaire des sciences sociales et des humanités d'Alsace France
Czech Academy of Sciences, Oriental Institute Czechia
Leipzig/Halle Airport Germany
Groupe d'Étude des Méthodes de l'Analyse Sociologique de la Sorbonne France
Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin relative to Deutsches Museum Germany Deutsches Museum's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×4×4.7×
Deutsches Museum · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin 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 Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin at the time of their publication.

About Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin have published 441 papers, which have received a total of 2.5k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 92 papers in History, 27 papers in History and Philosophy of Science, 130 papers in Political Science and International Relations, 122 papers in Sociology and Political Science and 8 papers in Museology on the topics of European history and politics (92 papers), German History and Society (41 papers), Communism, Protests, Social Movements (34 papers), Medical History and Research (23 papers), German Social Sciences and History (17 papers), Sociology and Education Studies (13 papers), Historical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics (12 papers) and Eastern European Communism and Reforms (11 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on History and Philosophy of Science (140 citations), History (250 citations), Paleontology (142 citations), Political Science and International Relations (439 citations) and Geophysics (229 citations). Authors at Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin collaborate with scholars in Germany, Austria and United States and have published in prestigious journals including Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, Historische Zeitschrift, Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, NTM Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften Technik und Medizin and Die Naturwissenschaften. Some of Institut für Zeitgeschichte München–Berlin's most productive authors include Gerhard Voll, Ivo Schneider, Michael Stolberg, R. Reiter, Markus Tausendpfund, Daniela Braun, Wolfgang Behringer, Joachim Hahn, E.F.K. Koerner and Aaron D. Stewart.

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