Contemporary Hypnosis

273 papers and 2.6k indexed citations i.

About

The 273 papers published in Contemporary Hypnosis in the last decades have received a total of 2.6k indexed citations. Papers published in Contemporary Hypnosis usually cover Cognitive Neuroscience (250 papers), Clinical Psychology (77 papers) and Psychiatry and Mental health (61 papers) specifically the topics of Pain Management and Placebo Effect (239 papers), Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology (52 papers) and Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments (45 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Contemporary Hypnosis are John Gruzelier, Graham F. Wagstaff, David A. Oakley, Irving Kirsch, Sakari Kallio, Antti Revonsuo, Éva Bányai, Christina Liossi, Peter Naish and Calvin Kai-Ching Yu.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Contemporary Hypnosis

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Contemporary Hypnosis. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Contemporary Hypnosis.

Countries where authors publish in Contemporary Hypnosis

Since Specialization
Citations

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

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025