Dan López de

579 citations
30 papers · 202 · h-index 9

Impact in

Papers in

Dan López de

29 papers receiving 183 citations

Peers

Dan López de
Comparison fields: 5 of 25
  • History and Philosophy of Science 61
  • Philosophy 136
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 148
  • Language and Linguistics 20
  • Family Practice 3
Replace Genoveva Martí with:
Genoveva Martí Spain
Wolfgang Künne Germany
Bradley Rives United States
José L. Zalabardo United Kingdom
David Liebesman Canada
Delia Graff Fara United States
J. L. Dowell United States
Samuel Guttenplan United Kingdom
Murali Ramachandran United Kingdom
E. J. Lowe
Dan López de relative to Genoveva Martí Spain Genoveva Martí's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×
Genoveva Martí · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Dan López de

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Dan López de'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 Dan López de with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dan López de more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Dan López de

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Dan López de. 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 Dan López de. The network helps show where Dan López de may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 2 scholars most cited alongside Dan López de, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Dan López de Line = papers co-authored together Dan López de links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 30 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201438
2 200719
3 200914
4 200713
5 202011
6 200610
7 20069
8 20078
9 20088
10
Rigidity for Predicates and the Trivialization Problem
20087
11 20067
12 20077
13 20076
14 20116
15 20135
16
Response-dependencies: colors and values
20035
17 20225
18 20114
19 20243
20 20073

About Dan López de

Dan López de is a scholar working on Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Philosophy, History and Philosophy of Science, Political Science and International Relations and Artificial Intelligence, having authored 30 papers that have together received 202 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Philosophy and Theoretical Science (18 papers), Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (13 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (7 papers), Classical Philosophy and Thought (4 papers), Philosophical Ethics and Theory (4 papers), Philosophy, Science, and History (2 papers), Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge (2 papers) and Political Philosophy and Ethics (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in History and Philosophy of Science (61 citations), Philosophy (136 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (148 citations), Language and Linguistics (20 citations) and Family Practice (3 citations). Dan López de has collaborated with scholars based in Spain, United Kingdom and United States. Frequent co-authors include Elia Zardini and Bianca Cepollaro. Their work appears in journals such as Synthese, Analysis, Erkenntnis, Philosophical Studies and Croatian Journal of Philosophy.

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact