Countries citing papers authored by James Chalmers
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of James Chalmers'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 James Chalmers with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites James Chalmers more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by James Chalmers. 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 James Chalmers. The network helps show where James Chalmers may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of James Chalmers
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of James Chalmers.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of James Chalmers 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 James Chalmers. James Chalmers is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Chalmers, James, et al.. (2014). Post-Corroboration Safeguards Review: Report of the Academic Expert Group. Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee).5 indexed citations
7.
Chalmers, James & Fiona Leverick. (2013). Tracking the creation of criminal offences. 42(8). 329–31.5 indexed citations
8.
Chalmers, James. (2011). Regulating adolescent sexuality: English and Scottish approaches compared. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
9.
Murphy, Jonathan, et al.. (2011). Half a Citizen: Reflections on work and welfare in contemporary Australia..1 indexed citations
10.
Leverick, Fiona & James Chalmers. (2010). The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and its referrals to the Appeal Court: the first ten years. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 indexed citations
Chalmers, James, Peter Duff, & Fiona Leverick. (2007). Victim impact statements: can work, do work (for those who bother to make them). ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).16 indexed citations
13.
Chalmers, James & Fiona Leverick. (2006). Criminal Defences and Pleas in Bar of Trial. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).4 indexed citations
14.
Chalmers, James. (2004). Merging provocation and diminished responsibility: some reasons for scepticism. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).
15.
Chalmers, James. (2004). Distress as corroboration of mens rea. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 indexed citations
16.
Chalmers, James. (2003). Reforming the pleas of insanity and diminished responsibility: some aspects of the Scottish Law commission’s discussion paper. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 indexed citations
17.
Chalmers, James. (2003). What impact for victim statements?. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 indexed citations
18.
Chalmers, James, Christopher Gane, & Fiona Leverick. (2003). Partial Defences to Homicide in the Law of Scotland: A Report to the Law Commission for England and Wales. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 indexed citations
19.
Chalmers, James. (2001). Collapsing the structure of criminal law. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).2 indexed citations
20.
Chalmers, James. (2001). Sexually transmitted diseases and the criminal law. ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam).1 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.