Health Psychology Review

447 papers and 26.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 447 papers published in Health Psychology Review in the last decades have received a total of 26.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Health Psychology Review usually cover Applied Psychology (251 papers), General Health Professions (118 papers) and Clinical Psychology (112 papers) specifically the topics of Behavioral Health and Interventions (233 papers), Mental Health Research Topics (66 papers) and Eating Disorders and Behaviors (50 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Health Psychology Review are Benjamin Gardner, Jonathan A. Smith, Falko F. Sniehotta, Mark Conner, Icek Ajzen, Natalie Taylor, Rebecca Lawton, Martin S. Hagger, Susan Michie and Gjalt-Jorn Peters.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Health Psychology Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Health Psychology 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 Health Psychology Review.

Countries where authors publish in Health Psychology Review

Since Specialization
Citations

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

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

Rankless by CCL
2025