Stephen John

37 papers receiving 435 citations

Peers

Stephen John
Comparison fields: 5 of 93
  • History and Philosophy of Science 61
  • Philosophy 124
  • Sociology and Political Science 230
  • General Health Professions 98
  • General Decision Sciences 7
Replace Alex Voorhoeve with:
Alex Voorhoeve United Kingdom
Roy Porter United Kingdom
Jacob Busch Denmark
William S. Robinson United States
Steve Sturdy United Kingdom
James H. Cassedy United States
Ann Steiner United States
Patrice Pinell France
Gopal Sreenivasan United States
Dan Stone United Kingdom
Stephen John relative to Alex Voorhoeve United Kingdom Alex Voorhoeve's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.5×
Alex Voorhoeve · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen John

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Stephen John'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 Stephen John with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stephen John more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen John

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen John. 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 Stephen John. The network helps show where Stephen John may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Stephen John, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Stephen John Line = papers co-authored together Stephen John links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 43 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201787
2 201456
3 201143
4 201440
5 201827
6 201023
7 202218
8 201318
9 200917
10 200713
11 202012
12 201612
13 202110
14 202010
15 20239
16 20189
17 20119
18 20208
19 20118
20 20236

About Stephen John

Stephen John is a scholar working on Philosophy, History and Philosophy of Science, General Health Professions, Health and Sociology and Political Science, having authored 43 papers that have together received 483 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (7 papers), Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies (6 papers), Ethics in medical practice (5 papers), Risk Perception and Management (5 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (4 papers), Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (4 papers), Climate Change Communication and Perception (4 papers) and Biomedical Ethics and Regulation (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in History and Philosophy of Science (61 citations), Philosophy (124 citations), Sociology and Political Science (230 citations), General Health Professions (98 citations) and General Decision Sciences (7 citations). Stephen John has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Frequent co-authors include Rebecca A. Dennison, Juliet A. Usher‐Smith, Norman Daniels, Anthony Kessel, Ainsley J. Newson, James Wilson, Bengt Brülde, Eli Y. Adashi, Angus Dawson and Stephen Wilkinson. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Applied Philosophy, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, Synthese, Journal of Medical Ethics and BMC Public Health.

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026