Richard M. Gale
- Philosophy top 0.5%
- Sociology and Political Science top 10%
- Health top 5%
- Clinical Psychology top 10%
- Social Psychology top 10%
- Co-authors
- Léo StraussAlexander R. PrussJohn F. PostJan Ν. BremmerGavin HymanKeith M. ParsonsPhil ZuckermanDaniel C. Dennett
- Topics
- Theology and Philosophy of Evil (14 papers)Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education (13 papers)Philosophy and Theoretical Science (7 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesUnited KingdomSouth Africa
In The Last Decade
Richard M. Gale
59 papers receiving 691 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 108
- Philosophy 332
- Sociology and Political Science 211
- Health 165
- Clinical Psychology 150
- Social Psychology 145
Countries citing papers authored by Richard M. Gale
This map shows the geographic impact of Richard M. Gale'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 Richard M. Gale with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Richard M. Gale more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Richard M. Gale
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Richard M. Gale. 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 Richard M. Gale. The network helps show where Richard M. Gale may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Richard M. Gale
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Richard M. Gale. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Richard M. Gale 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 Richard M. Gale. Richard M. Gale is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | Near misses in remote locations: investigating rail level crossing incidents in the Pilbara | 1 |
| 3 | The still divided self of William James: A response to Pawelski and Cooper | 0 |
| 4 | 2 | |
| 5 | The metaphysics of John Dewey | 3 |
| 6 | 1 | |
| 7 | 1 | |
| 8 | 26 | |
| 9 | 1 | |
| 10 | 2 | |
| 11 | Omniscience-Immutability Arguments | 9 |
| 12 | William James and the Ethics of Belief | 6 |
| 13 | 2 | |
| 14 | 1 | |
| 15 | The philosophy of time : a collection of essays | 21 |
| 16 | 0 | |
| 17 | Why a Cause Cannot Be Later than Its Effect | 5 |
| 18 | 4 | |
| 19 | 4 | |
| 20 | 7 |
About Richard M. Gale
Richard M. Gale is a scholar working on Philosophy, History and Philosophy of Science and General Psychology, having authored 69 papers that have together received 850 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Theology and Philosophy of Evil (14 papers), Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education (13 papers) and Philosophy and Theoretical Science (7 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Philosophy (332 citations), Health (165 citations) and History and Philosophy of Science (54 citations). Richard M. Gale has collaborated with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and South Africa. Frequent co-authors include Léo Strauss, Alexander R. Pruss, John F. Post, Jan Ν. Bremmer, Gavin Hyman, Keith M. Parsons, Phil Zuckerman, Daniel C. Dennett, John D. Caputo and Christine Overall. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of the American Chemical Society, The Philosophical Review and The Journal of Philosophy.
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.