Countries where authors publish in Financial Review
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Financial 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 Financial Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Financial Review more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Financial 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 Financial Review.
About Financial Review
The 1.6k papers published in Financial Review in the last decades have received a total of 27.2k indexed citations . Papers published in Financial Review usually cover Finance (1.1k papers), Accounting (905 papers), Economics and Econometrics (597 papers), General Economics, Econometrics and Finance (166 papers) and Strategy and Management (315 papers) specifically the topics of Financial Markets and Investment Strategies (838 papers), Corporate Finance and Governance (763 papers), Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance (379 papers), Financial Reporting and Valuation Research (253 papers), Housing Market and Economics (204 papers), Market Dynamics and Volatility (192 papers), Banking stability, regulation, efficiency (177 papers) and Monetary Policy and Economic Impact (158 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Financial Review are Brian M. Lucey, Dirk Baur, David Carter, Betty J. Simkins, Wayne Simpson, Robert W. Faff, Darren D. Lee, Lawrence J. Gitman, Robert E. DeYoung and Tara N. Rice.
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.