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.
Varieties of Police Behavior: The Management of Law and Order in Eight Communities
Countries citing papers authored by Jan M. Chaiken
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Jan M. Chaiken'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 Jan M. Chaiken with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jan M. Chaiken more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jan M. Chaiken. 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 Jan M. Chaiken. The network helps show where Jan M. Chaiken may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jan M. Chaiken
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jan M. Chaiken.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jan M. Chaiken 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 Jan M. Chaiken. Jan M. Chaiken is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Chaiken, Jan M. & Douglas McDonald. (1988). Drug Law Violators, 1980-86. Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report..3 indexed citations
2.
Rolph, John E. & Jan M. Chaiken. (1987). Identifying High Rate Serious Criminals from Official Records.10 indexed citations
3.
Chaiken, Jan M., et al.. (1983). The Impact of fiscal limitation on California's criminal justice system.3 indexed citations
4.
Peterson, Mark Allen, et al.. (1982). Survey of Prison and Jail Inmates.3 indexed citations
Chaiken, Jan M. & Warren E. Walker. (1980). Where did the money go. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC). 20(4). 837–46.9 indexed citations
7.
Walker, Warren E., et al.. (1980). The Impact of Proposition 13 on Local Criminal Justice Agencies: Emerging Patterns.4 indexed citations
8.
Chaiken, Jan M.. (1980). Two Patrol Car Deployment Models: History of Use, 1975-1979. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).3 indexed citations
9.
Walker, Warren E., et al.. (1979). Fire department deployment analysis : a public policy analysis case study. North-Holland eBooks.25 indexed citations
10.
Greenwood, Peter W., Jan M. Chaiken, Joan Petersilia, & Mark Allen Peterson. (1978). The RAND Habitual Offender Project.1 indexed citations
11.
Chaiken, Jan M., Peter W. Greenwood, & Joan Petersilia. (1976). The Criminal Investigation Process: A Summary Report,. Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC).60 indexed citations
Chaiken, Jan M.. (1971). Number of Emergency Units Busy at Alarms Which Require Multiple Servers.9 indexed citations
20.
Chaiken, Jan M. & Richard C. Larson. (1971). Methods for Allocating Urban Emergency Units. DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).9 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.