Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice
- Authors
- Anthony BottomsJustice Tankebe
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w11823294 →Countries where authors are citing Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice
This map shows the geographic impact of Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice. 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 Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice
This network shows the impact of Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice.
About Beyond Procedural Justice: A Dialogic Approach to Legitimacy in Criminal Justice
This paper, published in 2012, received 632 indexed citations . Written by Anthony Bottoms and Justice Tankebe covering the research area of Law. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Sociology and Political Science (566 citations), Political Science and International Relations (473 citations), Health (75 citations), Gender Studies (67 citations) and Law (62 citations). Published in The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-).
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w11823294.