Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences

1.6k citations
359 papers · · active since 1950

Impact in

Papers in

    • History of Science and Natural History 62
    • History of Science and Medicine 56
    • Twentieth Century Scientific Developments 45
    • Philosophy and History of Science 31
    • Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis 28

Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences

214 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Peers

Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences
Comparison fields: 5 of 174
  • History and Philosophy of Science 539
  • Theoretical Computer Science 26
  • Information Systems and Management 143
  • Geography, Planning and Development 89
  • Ecological Modeling 47
Replace Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung with:
Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung United States
Philosophia Christi United States
NTM Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften Technik und Medizin Germany
Journal of Philosophical Research United States
Intellectual History Review United Kingdom
THEORIA An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science Spain
Sententiae Ukraine
Philosophica United Kingdom
Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics Italy
Revue d anthropologie des connaissances France
Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences relative to Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung United States Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×10×15×20×23.5×
Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences. 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 Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences.

About Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences

The 359 papers published in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences in the last decades have received a total of 1.6k indexed citations . Papers published in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences usually cover History and Philosophy of Science (173 papers), General Psychology (8 papers), Theoretical Computer Science (6 papers), Astronomy and Astrophysics (44 papers) and Information Systems and Management (17 papers) specifically the topics of History of Science and Natural History (62 papers), History of Science and Medicine (56 papers), Twentieth Century Scientific Developments (45 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (31 papers), History and Developments in Astronomy (30 papers), Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis (28 papers), International Science and Diplomacy (26 papers) and Race, Genetics, and Society (18 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences are Evelyn Fox Keller, Наоми Орескес, Elena Aronova, Karen S. Baker, Catherine Westfall, Bruno J. Strasser, Olof Hallonsten, Tiago Saraiva, John Krige and Matthew L. Jones.

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