Countries where authors publish in Deviant Behavior
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Deviant Behavior. 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 Deviant Behavior with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Deviant Behavior more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Deviant Behavior. 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 Deviant Behavior.
About Deviant Behavior
The 2k papers published in Deviant Behavior in the last decades have received a total of 36.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Deviant Behavior usually cover Sociology and Political Science (1.3k papers), Clinical Psychology (247 papers), Health (99 papers), Gender Studies (117 papers) and Law (113 papers) specifically the topics of Crime Patterns and Interventions (635 papers), Crime, Deviance, and Social Control (372 papers), Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies (123 papers), Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes (107 papers), Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis (106 papers), Crime, Illicit Activities, and Governance (96 papers), Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending (95 papers) and Criminal Justice and Penology (92 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Deviant Behavior are Thomas J. Holt, Sameer Hinduja, Justin W. Patchin, Richard Tewksbury, Craig J. Forsyth, George E. Higgins, Richard C. Hollinger, Adam M. Bossler, Heith Copes and John K. Cochran.
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.