Clinical Psychology

1.4M papers and 33.5M indexed citations i.

About

1.4M papers covering Clinical Psychology have received a total of 33.5M indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development, Family and Disability Support Research and Eating Disorders and Behaviors and also cover the fields of Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science and General Health Professions. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science and Psychiatry and Mental health. Some of the most active scholars covering Clinical Psychology are Richard M. Ryan, Michael Rutter, David A. Kenny, Albert Bandura, Reuben M. Baron, James J. Gross, Robert L. Spitzer, Ronald C. Kessler, Robert Goodman and Edward L. Deci.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about Clinical Psychology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering Clinical 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 covering Clinical Psychology.

Countries where authors publish papers about Clinical Psychology

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research in Clinical 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 about Clinical Psychology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Clinical 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 fields with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025