Hume studies

583 papers and 2.3k indexed citations

About

The 583 papers published in Hume studies in the last decades have received a total of 2.3k indexed citations. Papers published in Hume studies usually cover Philosophy (399 papers), Political Science and International Relations (198 papers) and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (100 papers) specifically the topics of Philosophical Ethics and Theory (339 papers), Political Philosophy and Ethics (154 papers) and Philosophy and Theoretical Science (98 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Hume studies are David Norton, Annette C. Baier, John Immerwahr, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Elijah Millgram, Lorne Falkenstein, James Fieser, Janet Broughton, Fred Wilson and Robert J. Fogelin.

In The Last Decade

Hume studies

360 papers receiving 1.4k citations

Fields of papers published in Hume studies

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Hume studies. 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 Hume studies.

Countries where authors publish in Hume studies

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Hume studies. 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 Hume studies with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Hume studies 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
2026