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.
Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach
Citations per year, relative to Andrew Moravcsik Andrew Moravcsik (= 1×)
peers
Frank Schimmelfennig
Countries citing papers authored by Andrew Moravcsik
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Andrew Moravcsik'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 Andrew Moravcsik with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Andrew Moravcsik more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Andrew Moravcsik
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Andrew Moravcsik. 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 Andrew Moravcsik. The network helps show where Andrew Moravcsik may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Andrew Moravcsik
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Andrew Moravcsik.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Andrew Moravcsik 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 Andrew Moravcsik. Andrew Moravcsik is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2016). Government Favoritism in Europe. Foreign Affairs. 95(3). 37.3 indexed citations
9.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2016). Margaret Thatcher: : At her zenith; in London, Washington, and Moscow. Foreign Affairs. 95(2). 42.
10.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2016). Architects of the Euro: Intellectuals in the Making of European Monetary Union/The Euro and the Battle of Ideas.. Foreign Affairs. 95(6). 182–182.
11.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2016). New old world: : An indian journalist discovers the changing face of Europe. Foreign Affairs. 95(1). 40.1 indexed citations
12.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2015). States, debt, and power: : “Saints” and “Sinners” in European history and integration.. Foreign Affairs. 94(3). 173–173.8 indexed citations
13.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2014). The politicization of Europe: : contesting the constitution in the mass media. Foreign Affairs. 93(3). 185–186.45 indexed citations
14.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2014). Unhappy union: : how the euro crisis-and Europe-Can be fixed. Foreign Affairs. 93(6). 202–203.5 indexed citations
15.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2014). Ring of steel: : Germany and Austria-Hungary in World War I. Foreign Affairs. 93(6). 206–207.9 indexed citations
16.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2014). The gypsy "menace": : populism and the new anti-gypsy politics. Foreign Affairs. 93(3). 184–185.3 indexed citations
17.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2012). Europe After the Crisis. Foreign Affairs.14 indexed citations
18.
Lord, Christopher, et al.. (2008). Does the EU Suffer from a Democratic Deficit. Intereconomics. 2008(6). 316–340.1 indexed citations
19.
Moravcsik, Andrew, et al.. (2005). Europe without illusions : the Paul-Henri Spaak lectures, 1994-1999. University Press of America eBooks.1 indexed citations
20.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2000). Conservative Idealism and International Institutions. Chicago journal of international law. 1(2). 9.8 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.