Citations per year, relative to Joseph Sanders Joseph Sanders (= 1×)
peers
Gregory Mitchell
Countries citing papers authored by Joseph Sanders
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Joseph Sanders'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 Joseph Sanders with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Joseph Sanders more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Joseph Sanders. 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 Joseph Sanders. The network helps show where Joseph Sanders may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Joseph Sanders
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Joseph Sanders.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Joseph Sanders 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 Joseph Sanders. Joseph Sanders 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.
Horn, Linda Van, et al.. (2016). Comparison of Astrand VO2 Max Prediction to a Graded Leg Ergometry VO2 Max Test in Endurance Athletes. TopSCHOLAR (Western Kentucky University). 9(4). 104.1 indexed citations
2.
Sanders, Joseph. (2014). Why Do Proposals Designed to Control Variability in General Damages (Generally) Fall on Deaf Ears? (and Why This Is Too Bad). The De Paul law review. 55(2). 489.1 indexed citations
3.
Sanders, Joseph. (2010). Applying Daubert Inconsistently? Proof of Individual Causation in Toxic Tort and Forensic Cases. Brooklyn law review. 75(4). 16.1 indexed citations
4.
Sanders, Joseph. (2010). “UTTERLY INEFFECTIVE”: DO COURTS HAVE A ROLE IN IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF FORENSIC EXPERT TESTIMONY?. The Fordham urban law journal/Fordham urban law journal. 38(2). 547.
5.
Sanders, Joseph. (2009). Science, Law and the Expert Witness. Law and Contemporary Problems. 72(1). 63–90.3 indexed citations
6.
Sanders, Joseph. (2008). Reforming General Damages: A Good Tort Reform. HELIN Digital Commons. 13(1). 5.1 indexed citations
Cheng, Edward K., David L. Faigman, Michael J. Saks, & Joseph Sanders. (2006). Modern scientific evidence : the law and science of expert testimony.196 indexed citations
9.
Sanders, Joseph. (2003). The merits of the paternalistic justification for restrictions on the admissibility of expert evidence.. PubMed. 33(4). 881–941.3 indexed citations
Kaye, David H., David L. Faigman, Michael J. Saks, & Joseph Sanders. (2000). How Good is Good Enough?: Expert Evidence Under Daubert and Kuhmo. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
12.
Faigman, David L., David H. Kaye, Michael J. Saks, & Joseph Sanders. (2000). How Good is Good Enough?: Expert Evidence Under Daubert and Kuhmo. Case Western Reserve law review. 50(3). 645.3 indexed citations
Sanders, Joseph, et al.. (1998). An Assessment of the Academic Support System Available to Principles of Accounting Students. 10(2).4 indexed citations
15.
Sanders, Joseph. (1998). Bendectin on Trial. University of Michigan Press eBooks.20 indexed citations
16.
Sanders, Joseph. (1992). The Bendectin Litigation: A Case Study in the Life Cycle of Mass Torts. Hastings law journal. 43(2). 301.18 indexed citations
17.
Lempert, Richard & Joseph Sanders. (1986). An invitation to law and social science : desert, disputes, and distribution. Longman eBooks.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.