Family Court Review

1.6k papers and 13.4k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.6k papers published in Family Court Review in the last decades have received a total of 13.4k indexed citations. Papers published in Family Court Review usually cover Sociology and Political Science (573 papers), Demography (530 papers) and Clinical Psychology (373 papers) specifically the topics of Family Dynamics and Relationships (522 papers), Child Welfare and Adoption (303 papers) and Legal Systems and Judicial Processes (245 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Family Court Review are Joan B. Kelly, Janet R. Johnston, Michael P. Johnson, Nicholas Bala, William G. Austin, Richard A. Warshak, Matthew J. Sullivan, Jennifer McIntosh, Sanford L. Braver and Benjamin D. Garber.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Family Court Review

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Family Court Review. 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 Family Court Review.

Countries where authors publish in Family Court Review

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Family Court Review. 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 Family Court Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Family Court Review 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