North Carolina law review

1.5k papers and 6.1k indexed citations

About

The 1.5k papers published in North Carolina law review in the last decades have received a total of 6.1k indexed citations. Papers published in North Carolina law review usually cover Political Science and International Relations (537 papers), Law (435 papers) and Sociology and Political Science (349 papers) specifically the topics of Legal Systems and Judicial Processes (321 papers), Law, Rights, and Freedoms (183 papers) and Legal and Constitutional Studies (133 papers). The most active scholars publishing in North Carolina law review are John Powell, Richard A. Leo, Steven A. Drizin, J. B. Ruhl, Frank Dobbin, Jiwook Jung, Thomas Lee Hazen, Janet Ainsworth, Colleen V. Chien and Morris B. Hoffman.

In The Last Decade

North Carolina law review

464 papers receiving 2.4k citations

Fields of papers published in North Carolina law review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in North Carolina 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 North Carolina law review.

Countries where authors publish in North Carolina law review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in North Carolina 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 North Carolina 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 North Carolina law 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
2026