Countries where authors publish in Contemporary Justice Review
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Contemporary Justice Review. 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 published in Contemporary Justice Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Contemporary Justice Review more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Contemporary Justice Review
This network shows the impact of papers published in Contemporary Justice Review. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Contemporary Justice Review.
About Contemporary Justice Review
The 612 papers published in Contemporary Justice Review in the last decades have received a total of 5.6k indexed citations . Papers published in Contemporary Justice Review usually cover Sociology and Political Science (429 papers), Clinical Psychology (144 papers), Law (71 papers), Health (40 papers) and Nature and Landscape Conservation (58 papers) specifically the topics of Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis (252 papers), Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending (93 papers), Crime Patterns and Interventions (84 papers), Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses (56 papers), Law in Society and Culture (40 papers), Homelessness and Social Issues (39 papers), Education Discipline and Inequality (36 papers) and Torture, Ethics, and Law (26 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Contemporary Justice Review are Mary Romero, Chong‐suk Han, Janine Natalya Clark, Markus-Michael Müller, Kathleen Daly, Mara Schiff, Mark S. Umbreit, Tony N. Brown, Tanya Wyatt and Hennessey Hayes.
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.