The Review of Economics and Statistics

432.6k citations
5.8k papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

Papers in

    • Monetary Policy and Economic Impact 852
    • Global trade and economics 489
    • Economic Theory and Policy 444
    • Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth 600
    • Economic Growth and Productivity 591
    • Economic theories and models 538
    • Housing Market and Economics 391
    • Labor market dynamics and wage inequality 387

The Review of Economics and Statistics

4.8k papers receiving 348.4k citations

Peers

The Review of Economics and Statistics
Comparison fields: 5 of 249
  • General Economics, Econometrics and Finance 107.5k
  • Economics and Econometrics 264.6k
  • Finance 68.2k
  • Accounting 55.5k
  • Strategy and Management 51.3k
Replace The Review of Economic Studies with:
The Review of Economic Studies United States
The Economic Journal United Kingdom
Journal of Econometrics United States
Southern Economic Journal United States
Economics Letters United States
European Economic Review United States
Economica United Kingdom
Journal of Political Economy United States
The Quarterly Journal of Economics United States
Applied Economics United States
The Review of Economics and Statistics relative to The Review of Economic Studies United States The Review of Economic Studies's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
The Review of Economic Studies · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in The Review of Economics and Statistics

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in The Review of Economics and Statistics. 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 The Review of Economics and Statistics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Review of Economics and Statistics more than expected).

Fields of papers published in The Review of Economics and Statistics

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in The Review of Economics and Statistics. 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 The Review of Economics and Statistics.

About The Review of Economics and Statistics

The 5.8k papers published in The Review of Economics and Statistics in the last decades have received a total of 432.6k indexed citations . Papers published in The Review of Economics and Statistics usually cover General Economics, Econometrics and Finance (1.5k papers), Economics and Econometrics (3.5k papers), Finance (622 papers), Accounting (560 papers) and General Decision Sciences (73 papers) specifically the topics of Monetary Policy and Economic Impact (852 papers), Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth (600 papers), Economic Growth and Productivity (591 papers), Economic theories and models (538 papers), Global trade and economics (489 papers), Economic Theory and Policy (444 papers), Housing Market and Economics (391 papers) and Labor market dynamics and wage inequality (387 papers). The most active scholars publishing in The Review of Economics and Statistics are Robert M. Solow, Paul A. Samuelson, Tim Bollerslev, Robert C. Merton, Jeffrey H. Bergstrand, Aart Kraay, John C. Driscoll, João Santos Silva, Silvana Tenreyro and Wassily Leontief.

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact