Countries where authors publish in Indiana Law Review
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Indiana Law 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 Indiana Law Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Indiana Law Review more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Indiana Law 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 Indiana Law Review.
About Indiana Law Review
The 555 papers published in Indiana Law Review in the last decades have received a total of 1.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Indiana Law Review usually cover Law (162 papers), Political Science and International Relations (192 papers), Accounting (58 papers), Pharmacy (19 papers) and Economics and Econometrics (94 papers) specifically the topics of Legal Systems and Judicial Processes (123 papers), Law, Rights, and Freedoms (42 papers), Legal Education and Practice Innovations (36 papers), Legal and Constitutional Studies (35 papers), Criminal Law and Evidence (32 papers), American Constitutional Law and Politics (30 papers), Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (28 papers) and Business Law and Ethics (23 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Indiana Law Review are Gerald L. Bepko, Elinor Ostrom, Robert K. Vischer, Tanya Hayes, Shanto Iyengar, David Millon, Frank Sullivan, Stefanie DeLuca, Michael S. Kang and William M. Sage.
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.