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 Lawrence Baum'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 Lawrence Baum with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Lawrence Baum more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Lawrence Baum. 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 Lawrence Baum. The network helps show where Lawrence Baum may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Lawrence Baum
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Lawrence Baum.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Lawrence Baum 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 Lawrence Baum. Lawrence Baum 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.
Baum, Lawrence, et al.. (2019). Two Roads Diverged: Statutory Interpretation by the Circuit Courts and Supreme Court in The Same Cases. Fordham law review. 88(3). 823.
2.
Baum, Lawrence, et al.. (2015). Dictionaries 2.0: Exploring the Gap Between the Supreme Court and Courts of Appeals. eYLS (Yale Law School). 104.1 indexed citations
Baum, Lawrence. (2014). Hiring Supreme Court Law Clerks: Probing the Ideological Linkage Between Judges and Justices. Marquette law review. 98(1). 333.6 indexed citations
Baum, Lawrence, et al.. (2013). Oasis or Mirage: The Supreme Court's Thirst for Dictionaries in the Rehnquist and Roberts Eras. eYLS (Yale Law School). 55(2). 483.2 indexed citations
7.
Baum, Lawrence. (2011). Probing the Power of the Supreme Court, reviewing Tom S. Clark, The Limits of Judicial Independence and Matthew E. K. Hall, The Nature of Supreme Court Power. Tulsa law journal. 48(2). 203.1 indexed citations
8.
Baum, Lawrence. (2010). Judicial Specialization and the Adjudication of Immigration Cases. Duke Law Journal. 59(8). 1501–1561.8 indexed citations
9.
Baum, Lawrence & Neal Devins. (2010). Why the Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not the American People. The Georgetown law journal.10 indexed citations
10.
Baum, Lawrence. (2009). Probing the Effects of Judicial Specialization. Duke Law Journal. 58(7). 1667–1684.20 indexed citations
11.
Williams, Margaret S. & Lawrence Baum. (2006). Questioning Judges about Their Decisions: Supreme Court Nominees before the Senate Judiciary Committee. 90(2). 73.11 indexed citations
Baum, Lawrence. (1989). Voters' Information in Judicial Elections: The 1986 Contests for the Ohio Supreme Court. Kentucky law journal. 77(3). 12.4 indexed citations
Baum, Lawrence. (1976). Decisions to Grant and Deny Hearings in the California Supreme Court: Patterns in Court and Individual Behavior. Santa Clara law review. 16(4). 713.8 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.