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.
This map shows the geographic impact of Dan Zahavi'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 Zahavi with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Dan Zahavi more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Dan Zahavi. 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 Zahavi. The network helps show where Dan Zahavi may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Dan Zahavi
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Dan Zahavi.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Dan Zahavi 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 Dan Zahavi. Dan Zahavi is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Zahavi, Dan, et al.. (2019). How We Feel: Collective Emotions Without Joint Commitments. Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen).1 indexed citations
4.
Zahavi, Dan. (2015). You, Me, and We: The Sharing of Emotional Experiences. Journal of Consciousness Studies. 22.74 indexed citations
5.
Zahavi, Dan. (2012). Husserl, self and others: an interview with Dan Zahavi. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología.
Zahavi, Dan. (2012). Michel Henry i fenomenologia niewidzialnego (przeł. P. Sosnowska). 315–333.
8.
Zahavi, Dan. (2011). Mutual enlightenment and transcendental thought. Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen).1 indexed citations
9.
Zahavi, Dan. (2011). Fenomenologia a projekt naturalizacji. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología.
10.
Zahavi, Dan. (2011). Varieties of reflection. Journal of Consciousness Studies. 18(2).9 indexed citations
11.
Zahavi, Dan. (2007). Killing the straw man. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. 6.3 indexed citations
12.
Zahavi, Dan. (2006). Two takes on a one-level account of consciousness. Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen). 12.10 indexed citations
13.
Zahavi, Dan. (2005). INTENTIONNALITÉ ET EXPÉRIENCE. 20(2). 299–318.8 indexed citations
Zahavi, Dan. (2003). How to investigate subjectivity: Heidegger and Natorp on reflection. Continental Philosophy Review. 155–176.3 indexed citations
16.
Zahavi, Dan & Frederik Stjernfelt. (2002). One Hundred Years of Phenomenology Husserl's Logical Investigations Revisited. Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks.8 indexed citations
17.
Zahavi, Dan. (1998). Self-awareness, temporality, and alterity : central topics in phenomenology. Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen).4 indexed citations
18.
Depraz, Natalie & Dan Zahavi. (1998). Alterity and facticity : new perspectives on Husserl. Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks.10 indexed citations
19.
Zahavi, Dan. (1997). Husserls Fænomenologi. Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen).2 indexed citations
20.
Zahavi, Dan. (1997). Horizontal intentionality and transcendental intersubjectivity. Tijdschrift voor Philosophie. 59(2).21 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.