Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom.
1962466 citationsAlan T. Peacock, Jack Wiseman et al.profile →
Citations per year, relative to Alan T. Peacock Alan T. Peacock (= 1×)
peers
Ronald L. Meek
Countries citing papers authored by Alan T. Peacock
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Alan T. Peacock's research. 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 Alan T. Peacock with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Alan T. Peacock more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Alan T. Peacock. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Alan T. Peacock. The network helps show where Alan T. Peacock may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Alan T. Peacock
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Alan T. Peacock.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Alan T. Peacock based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Alan T. Peacock. Alan T. Peacock is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Peacock, Alan T. & Ilde Rizzo. (2008). The Heritage Game: Economics, Policy, and Practice. OUP Catalogue.44 indexed citations
7.
Castles, Ian, Indur M. Goklany, David Henderson, et al.. (2006). The Stern Review: A Dual Critique. Part II: Economic Aspects. World Economy.38 indexed citations
8.
Peacock, Alan T.. (1998). Does the past have a future? : the political economy of heritage. OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique).29 indexed citations
9.
Sangha, S. P. S., David M. Jacobson, & Alan T. Peacock. (1998). Development of the copper-tin diffusion-brazing process. Welding Journal. 77(10).4 indexed citations
10.
Peacock, Alan T., et al.. (1994). Cases in organisational behaviour. Pitman eBooks.1 indexed citations
Rizzo, Ilde & Alan T. Peacock. (1987). Government Debt and Growth in Public Spending. Public finance. 42(2). 283–291.
13.
Peacock, Alan T., Martin Ricketts, Jonathan Robinson, & Rachel Brett. (1984). The Regulation Game: How British and West German Companies Bargain With Government. Medical Entomology and Zoology.6 indexed citations
14.
Peacock, Alan T.. (1972). New Methods of Appraising Government Expenditure: An Economic Analysis. Public finance. 27(2). 85–91.1 indexed citations
15.
Peacock, Alan T. & G. K. Shaw. (1971). Fiscal policy and the employment problem in less developed countries.3 indexed citations
16.
Peacock, Alan T. & G. K. Shaw. (1971). Fiscal Measures to Improve Employment in Developing Countries: A Technical Note. Public finance. 26(3). 409–418.1 indexed citations
17.
Peacock, Alan T.. (1969). Welfare Economics and Public Subsidies to the Arts. Manchester School. 37(4). 323–335.30 indexed citations
18.
Peacock, Alan T. & Anthony J. Culyer. (1969). Economic aspects of student unrest. Medical Entomology and Zoology.3 indexed citations
19.
Peacock, Alan T., et al.. (1961). Scope and Method. NBER Chapters. 1–11.3 indexed citations
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.