Countries where authors publish in Probation Journal
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Probation Journal. 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 Probation Journal with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Probation Journal more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Probation Journal. 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 Probation Journal.
About Probation Journal
The 1.0k papers published in Probation Journal in the last decades have received a total of 6.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Probation Journal usually cover Public Administration (61 papers), Clinical Psychology (345 papers), General Health Professions (325 papers), Sociology and Political Science (531 papers) and Health (39 papers) specifically the topics of Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis (462 papers), Homelessness and Social Issues (290 papers), Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending (192 papers), Crime Patterns and Interventions (144 papers), Child Abuse and Trauma (105 papers), Social Work Education and Practice (58 papers), Intimate Partner and Family Violence (37 papers) and Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes (29 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Probation Journal are Madeline Petrillo, Fiona Measham, Fergus McNeill, Susan Batchelor, Stuart P. Taylor, Julian Buchanan, Ros Burnett, Gwen Robinson, Anne Worrall and Jane Dominey.
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.