Political Psychology

2.2k papers and 81.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 2.2k papers published in Political Psychology in the last decades have received a total of 81.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Political Psychology usually cover Sociology and Political Science (1.5k papers), Political Science and International Relations (643 papers) and Social Psychology (544 papers) specifically the topics of Social and Intergroup Psychology (844 papers), Electoral Systems and Political Participation (345 papers) and Cultural Differences and Values (341 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Political Psychology are John T. Jost, Stanley Feldman, Leonie Huddy, John Duckitt, Daniel Bar‐Tal, Don Andrews, Stephen D. Hart, James Bonta, Ted Goertzel and Brian A. Nosek.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Political Psychology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Political Psychology. 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 Political Psychology.

Countries where authors publish in Political Psychology

Since Specialization
Citations

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