The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation
- Journal
- Medical Entomology and Zoology
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w80234172 →Countries where authors are citing The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation
This map shows the geographic impact of The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation. 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 The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation
This network shows the impact of The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation.
About The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation
This paper, published in 1975, received 915 indexed citations . Written by Margaret S. Mahler, Fred Pine and Anni Bergman covering the research area of Philosophy, Clinical Psychology and General Psychology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Clinical Psychology (611 citations), Social Psychology (287 citations) and Sociology and Political Science (130 citations). Published in Medical Entomology and Zoology.
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/w80234172.